BharatTaxGST

Lakshmi Ganapati Traders vs. The State Of Ap

Original PDF →
WP/2158/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01003836202528 January 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM7 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. VADREVU S K KRISHNA KANTH ^For Respondent: 1 .GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV (Special Original Jurisdiction) I WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY^J TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN 7 11^ o c. r» RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 2158 OF 202fi Between: Lakshmi Ganapati Traders, Regd. Office Uppugunduru, Prakasam District Andhra Proprietor Amara Venkata Subba Rao at D. No. 65/2, Eedumudi Road Pradesh - 523 186 Rep. by its ...PETITIONER_ AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Dept., Velagapudi, Amaravati 2. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Ongole District 3. The Commercial Tax Officer, Chirala Circle 4. The Deputy Asst. Commissioner Prakasam District. by its Principal Secretary Revenue (CT) -1 Circle, Ongole Prakasam (ST), Ongole -1 Circle, Ongole ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying at in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High ourt may be pleased to issue- an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS impugned Assessment Order passed by the 3'" Respondent i 37929235081/2015-16 (CST) vide AAO 185632 Df 21.11 2019 consequential demand and declaring the in Asst, in TIN and the recovery proceedings of the 4'^ Respondent No. 2D370224002236V Dt. 03.02.2025 in form GST DRC 7A vide Ref Ref f . ^ - M- No. ZD370224006629E Dt. 09.02.2025 Dt. 07.03.2025 .which does p.-" illegal, arbitrary, violative of the and in Ref No. ZD370224006008S contain any signature or DEM as being provisions of CST Act, contrary to the law ^ aside the same, and settled by this Hon'ble Court and set consequently direct the Respondents to conduct fresh assessment proceedings by duly accepting the statutory C forms and F forms submitted by the Petitioner.- lA NO: 1 OF 2()9ii ^ Petition under Section 15? CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed iin support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to STAY the operation of impugned Assessment Order passed by the 3™Respondent 37929235081/2015-16 (CST) vide AAO: in Asst, in TIN 185632 Dt. 21.11.2019 and all pending disposal of the other recovery proceedings against the Petitioner present Writ Petition. ^ Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. VADREVU S K KRISHNA KANTH ^ Counsel for the Respondent No’s. 1 to 4: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following ORDER; APHC010038362025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3508] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 2158/2025 Between: Lakshmi Ganapati Traders ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VADREVU S K KRISHNA KANTH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sh Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with an assessment order in Form GST DRC- 07, dated 21.11.2019, passed by the 3'^ respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition.

for the 2015-16. This order

2.

This assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, is challenged by Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, would not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment, another Division Bench of this Court, 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.

\ W.P.No.2158 of 2025 ‘7

6.

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-est and invalid.

7.

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 mitigate against the validity of such proceedings. Another Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors \/s. The Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam^, had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.

8.

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) <3.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)

4 RRR,J&MRK,J^ W.P.No.2158of2025^

9.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 21.11.2019, issued by the respondent, with liberty to the 3'^ 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. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR / fi / /Ad. //// SECTION OFFICER To,

1.

The Principal Secretary Revenue (CT) Dept., State of Andhra Pradesh Velagapudi, Amaravati

2.

The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Ongole -1 Circle, Ongole Prakasailrr' District

3.

The Commercial Tax Officer, Chirala Circle

4.

The Deputy Asst. Commissioner (ST), Ongole -1 Circle, Ongole^ Prakasam District

5.

One CC to SRI. VADREVU S K KRISHNA KANTH, Advocate [OPUC]

6.

Two CCs to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

7.

Three CD Copies PRK

f HIGH COURT DATED:29/01/2025 K ' • -1 • ORDER WP.No.2158 of 2025 2 S JUN 2U'A O .«o 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.