Leela Krishna Automobiles Private Limited vs. The State Of Ap

Original PDF →
WP/1000/2025HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01001865202509 January 2025Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM4 pages
For Petitioner: T V P SAI VIHARIFor Respondent: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010018652025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3508] FRIDAY, THE TENTH 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: 1000/2025 Between: Leela Krishna Automobiles Private Limited ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T V P SAI VIHARI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with an assessment order, dated 28.11.2023, passed by the 2nd respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the period February, 2022. This assessment order of the 2nd respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition. 2 RRR, J & MRK, J W.P.No.1000 of 2025 2. This assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number. 3. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned

assessment order.

4.

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 & Ors1. 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.

5.

A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa 2, 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 non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.

6.

In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the 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.

7.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned proceedings, dated 28.11.2023, issued by the 2nd respondent, with liberty to the 2nd respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving 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 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. _______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J

Date: 10.01.2025 MJA

3 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

WRIT PETITION NO:1000 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

10th January, 2025

MJA

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.