Fermium Constructions LLP vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
the Order, Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC- 07, dated 16.03.2024, without issuing Form GST DRC-01A, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the CGST/SGST Act 2017, without juri iction frivolous, and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Article 14 of the Constitution of India. bias, contrary to lA NO: 1 OF 202fi Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Orders, dated 16.03.2024 ^ 16.03.2024, the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 16.03.2024 & 16.03.2024 and Proceedings dated 16.03.2024 passed by the 1®* Respondent, for the tax period 2021-22 & 2022-23. under CGST/SGST Act, 2017, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, aS otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK ALTAF Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3:GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.5: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR CBIC The Court made the following: ORDER
1 \ APHC010105172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3529] WEDNE AY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 5428/2025 Between: Fermium Constructions Lip ...PETITIONER AND The Deputy Assistant Commissioner and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: ...RESPONDENT{S) 1.SHAIKALTAF Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
The Court made the following: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 16.03.2024, passed by the respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the period 2021-2022 & 2022-2023. This order has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition.
2
This assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, is chaiienged by Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment, another Division this Court, provisions of 2017, would Bench of in the case of M/s. M/s. Commissioner ST & ors ■
s, 3 officer, on the assessment order, would render the assessment order invalid and set aside the said order.
The question of the effect of non-inclusion of DIN number on proceedings, under the G.S.T. Act, came to be considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Goya! Vs. Union of India & Ors\ The Hon’ble Supreme Court, after noticing the provisions of the Act and the circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (herein referred to as “C.B.I.C.”), had held that an order, which does not contain a DIN number would be non-esf and invalid.
A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa on the basis of the circular, dated 23.12.2019, bearing No. 128/47/2019-GST, issued by the C.B.I.C., had held that non-mention of a Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam^, had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.
In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number and absence of the signature of the assessing officer, in the impugned assessment order would have to be set aside. ^ 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) " 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.) ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 16.03.2024, issued by the respondent, with liberty to the respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a signature to the said order. The period from the date of the impugned assessment order, till the date of receipt of this Order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs.
K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR /' //// fr ^ SECTION OFFICER To,
The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gajuwaka Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division, A.P.
The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gajuwaka Circle, Visakhapatnam, A.P.
The Principal Secretary, (Commercial Taxes Department), State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.
The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Union of India, North Block, New Delhi 110 001. 5. The Chairman, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi- 100 001. 6. One CC to Sri Shaik Altaf, Advocate [OPUC]
One CC to Sri Pasala Ponna Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of India, High Court of A.P. [OPUC]
One CC to M/s. Santhi Chandra, SC for CBIC[OPUC]
Two CC’s to GP for Commercial Tax, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT]
Three CD Copies. ssb
HIGH COURT DATED:12/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.5428 of 2025 S’ 27 MAR 2025 n ^ . Current Section ^^£espATC>^^ DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.