BharatTaxGST

M/S.Kvr Vcpl Jv vs. The Appellant Authority And Additional Commissioner (St)

Original PDF →
WP/27571/2024HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01052792202404 February 2025Bench: NINALA JAYASURYA,SUMATHI JAGADAM6 pages
For Respondent: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 27571 OF 2024 Between: ^ M/s.KVR VCPL JV, D. No.54-20-06, floor, Kankadurga Gazetted Officers Colony, Gurunank Colony, Krishna-520008 Andhra Pradesh Rep bv its Managing Partner, Mr. Krishna Kumar Thotakura. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Appellant Authority and Additional Commissioner (ST) Viiayawada Krishna District, State of Andhra Pradesh. j/ - 2. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Autonagar Circle-ll, Viiayawada N.T.R. District, State of Andhra Pradesh. 3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring the action of the 1®' Respondent in rejecting the appeal filed by the Petitioner under Section 107 of the Act, as the Respondent has no power to condone the delay beyond four months, and the Summary of the Order in FORM GST DRC -07 of the 2"^ Respondent, dated 25.04.2023 passed for the tax period April, 2020 to March, 2021 uploaded in the GST portal without either physically nor digitally signed which is contrary in Rule 26 (3) of the CGST Rules 2017, as legally may unenforceable and non-est in the eye of law and set-aside the same, and illegal arbitrary ab initio void contrary to the provisions of COST Act and Rules 2017under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and the State Goods and Service Tax Act 2017, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the CGST / SGST Act 2017, without jurisdiction and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently set aside the Endorsement Proceedings of the 1st Respondent, dated 30.07.2024 uploaded in the GST Portal and Summary of the Order, dated 25.04.2023 of the 2^^ Respondent. in lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Summary of the Order, dated 25.04.2023 passed by the 2'^^ Respondent for the tax period April, 2020 to March, 2021 under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and the State Goods and Service Tax 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 VENKATRAM REDDY MANTUR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following: ORDER

APHC010527922024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3494] WEDNE AY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 27571/2024 Between; M/s.kvr VcpI Jv ...PETITIONER AND The Appellant Authority And Additional Commissioner St ...RESPONDENT(S) and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Mr. Venkatram Reddy Mantur Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following Order: (per NJS,J) The present writ petition is filed seeking following relief:- “...to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring the action of the f‘ Respondent in rejecting the appeal filed by the Petitioner under Section 107 of the Act, as the f‘ Respondent has no power to condone the delay beyond four months, and the Summary of the Order in FORM GST DRC-07 of the 2”'^ Respondent, dated 25.04.2023 passed for the tax period April,2020 to March, 2021 uploaded in the GST portal without either physically nor digitally signed which is contrary in Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, as legally unenforceable and non-est in the eye of law and set-aside the same, and as illegal arbitrary ab initio void contrary to the provisions of CGST Act and Rules 2017 under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and the State Goods and Service Tax Act 2017, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the CGST/SGST Act 2017, without Juri iction and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently set aside the Endorsement Proceedings of the Respondent, dated 30.07.2024 uploaded in the GST Portal and Summary of the Order, dated 25.04.2023 of the 2”^ Respondent and pass such other order or orders...” Contd...

NJS,J & JS,J W.PNo.27571 of 2024 - 2 Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, would not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment, another Division Bench in the case of M/s. M/s. Commissioner ST & ors, in W.P.No.5238 of 2024, following the aforesaid two Judgments, had held that the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the assessment order, would render the assessment order invalid and set aside the said order. In a recent decision dated 18.12.2024, a Division Bench of this Court, 5. allowed W.P No.28720 of 2024 in similar circumstances. Contd...

NJS,J&JS,J W.P No.27571 of 2024 3

6.

Following the aforesaid Judgments, the impugned assessment order would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned assessment order. Consequently, the endorsement of the 1®' respondent in the appeal against a non-est order in the eye of law is also not sustainable. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 25.04.2023, and the Endorsement dated 30.07.2024, with liberty to the 2^"^ 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.

7.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed. . P.VINOD KUMAR assistant registrar Al— //// SECTION OFFICER To, ^ Authority and Additional Commissioner Krishna District, State of Andhra Pradesh. N^T R (ST). Autonagar Circle N. I .K. District, state of Andhra Pradesh. (ST), Vijayawada, -II, Vijayawada,

4.

One CC to Sri Venkatram Reddy Mantur, Advocate [OPUC] [OUT?*^^ Commercial Tax. High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

6.

Three C.D. Copies. Cnr

HIGH COURT DATED:05/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.27571 of 2024 27JUN 2025 ov ITS . ac o Cutrenl Section ★ 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.