M/S Technosoft Solutions vs. The Deputy Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
order directing the 2 Respondent to sanction the refund of tax demand of Rs. 32,05,720/- recovered by debiting the Petitioners Bank Account by issuing Notice to third party vide DRC -13 dated 10-01-2025 consequent to the impugned order passed' A(id ■>( ■mi ^ .V/ nd iii. Consequently , the Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction , or order to set aside the actions of the 2'^'^ Respondent in attaching the Bank Account of the petitioner vide DRC -13 dated 10-01-2025 and direct the 5*'^ Respondent to lift the attachment of the Petitioners Bank Account. ^ lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the notice issued under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017 dated 18-01-2024 bearing Ref. No. and Notice No: ZD37370124009530W dated 18-01-2024, for the Tax Period 2019-2020 AND order passed under section 73(9) dated 10-04-2024 bearing Ref. No. ZD370424008871F dated 10-04-2024, for the Tax Period2019-20. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR _ Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX ^ The Court made the following order:
APHC010069462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) 050 [3508] t 0SS WEDNE AY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 4129/2025 Between: M/s Technosoft Solutions ...PETITIONER AND The Deputy Commissioner and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (perHon’ble Sh Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with an assessment order, dated 10.04.2024, passed by the respondent, under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the period 2019-2020. This assessment order of the 1®' respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition. ...RESPONDENT(S) This assessment order is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number. 2. 2
Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, oi instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned assessment 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 Goyal 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-est 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 DIN number would Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam^, had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order 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.)
3 In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the 6. C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number in the order, which was uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned order to be set aside. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned proceedings, dated 10.04.2024, issued by the 1®* respondent, with a liberty to the respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving a notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number to the said order. The period from the date of the impugned assessment order, till the date of receipt 7. of this order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand so/-M. RANIESH BABU deputy SECTION OFFICER 2 Msistant Commissioner, (ST) Siripuram C.rcle, Vrsak apa n Division Visakahpatnam Dist. Department, State °f Andhra^ [OUT] ^ .
Two CD Copies closed. //// To, -1 ram
V HIGH COURT DATED: 19/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.4129 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WP 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.