Chinmaya Enterprises vs. The Assistant Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order passed vide Ref. No. ZD370924014028E dated 21.09.2024
(Annexure P-1) for the FY 2019-20 (DRC-07 summary Order Ref No. ZD370924014065G) and FY 2020-21 (DRC-07 summary Order No. ZD37a924014028E) without any valid Document Identification Number without; juns^iction, unconstitutional, unreasonable, in violation of Article 265 of the Constitution of India and against the principles of natural justice. as 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 the operation of the proceedings of the 1st Respondent in Assessment Order issued ZD370924014028E dated 21.09.2024 (Annexure P-1) in the interest of Justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. ANIL KUMAR BEZAWADA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1&2: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following order:
APHC010006572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) WEDNE AY. THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 460/20?.^ [3508] RAO Between: Chinmaya Enterprises ...PETITIONER AND The Assistant Commissioner and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.ANIL KUMAR BEZAWADA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: ...RESPONDENT{S) (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with 21.09.2024, passed by the respondent, under the Goods Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the period from 2019-2020 2021. This assessment order of the 1=^ respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition. an assessment order, dated and Service Tax & 2020-
This assessment order, in Form GST DRC-07, is chaiienged by on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number. the petitioner ■v
2 Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on 3. 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 4. 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. 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.
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. ' 2022 (63) G.S.T.L 286 (SC) ^ 2024 (8«),<^.T.L. 179 (A.P.) ^ 2024 (88) (^.T.L. 303 (A.P.)
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned proceedings, dated 21.09.2024, issued by the respondent, with liberty to the 1®* 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. 7. f/ \ In addition to this, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the assessment order could not have been passed by the officer who has conducted the audit.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would also submit that necessary Circular had also been issued by the department requiring nominating the proper officer as the assessing authority in such cases. He would submit that the impugned order would have to be set aside on this ground also and directions would have to be given for conduct of assessment by a proper officer only.
As this Court is set aside the impugned order of the assessment the ground that no DIN number has been attached to the order, this issue is being left open for consideration by the department and for a decision as to whether the officer who had conducted the audit would take up the assessment or the assessment would be handed over to the proper officer. There shall be no order as to costs. 10. on 4 As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. V.DIWAKAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR / //// SECTION OFFICER To,
The Assistant Commissioner, (ST)(FAC), O/o the Regional GST Audit Enft. Office 705, 7th Floor, Padmavathi Nilayam, Tirupati 517 503. 2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (Commercial Tax) A.P. State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velegapudi.
The Secretary (Revenue), Union of India, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. and 4. One CC to Sri. Anil Kumar Bezawada Advocate [OPUC] GP for Commercial Tax, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh.
Two CCs to [OUT]
Three CD Copies GSC
high court DATED:08/01/2025 \ ORDER WP.No.460 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.