Devi Engineering And Constructions Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner (Stata Tax)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order or Direction may more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring that the two impugned Ex- Parte Best Judgment Assessment Orders passed by the Respondent for the Months of April and May, 2024 of the F.Y. 2024-25, First vide Reference No. ZD370624009700L/DyAc-1/Apr- 24/2023-24, dated 14- 06-2024 and Reference No. ZD370724015327D/DyAc-1 May-24/2024-25, dated 19-07- 2024, under Section 62 of the GST Acts, 2017, without
electronically generated DINs, without issuing show cause notices and \flij1Jiout affording opportunity of personal hearing, and not withdrawing the ^^n after the Petitioner has filed the Returns for the said two with Late Fees and paid the taxes due, as invalid and - o have never have issued, violative of the principles of natural • ; justice, contrary to S. 75(4) of the GST Acts, 2017, arbitrary, capricious amounts to duplication of tax liability for the same tax periods and illegal and consequently set aside the same. 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 grant stay of all further proceedings, including recovery of tax and interest, pursuant to the impugned Ex-Parte Best Judgment Assessment Orders passed by the First Respondent for the Months of April and May, 2024 of the F.Y. 2024-25, ZD370624009700L/DyAc-1/Apr-24/2023-24, Reference No. ZD370724015327D/ DyAc-1/May-24/2024-25, dated 19-07- 2024, under Section 62 of the GST Acts, 2017. vide Reference No. dated 14-06-2024 and Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI G. NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI P. PONNA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010600442024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Juri iction) [3508] WEDNE AY, THE EIGHTH 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: 31473/2024 Between: Devi Engineering And Constructions Private Limited AND The Assistant Commissioner Stata Tax and Others ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.GNARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following order: (perHon’ble Sh Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with an assessment orders vide Reference No.ZD370624009700L/DyAc-1/Apr-24/2023-24, dated 14.06.2024 No.ZD370724015327D/DyAc-1/May-24/2024-25 19.07.2024, passed by the 1®^ respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the period from 2024-2025. These assessment orders of the 1®‘ respondent have been challenged by the dated and Reference petitioner in this Writ Petition.
2
These assessment orders, in Form GST ASMT-13 challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number. are 3. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned assessment orders. Tax, on 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 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 ^ 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 ' 2022 (63) G.S.T.L 286 (SC) ^2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)
3 Deputy Commissioner, Speciai Circie, 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 these orders, which uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned orders to be set aside. 6. was 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned orders, dated 14.06.2024 & 19.07.2024, issued by the 1 respondent, with liberty to the 1®* respondent to conduct fresh St assessment, after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number to the said orders. The period from the date of the impugned assessment orders date of receipt of this Order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs. till the "’>• pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall l.i stand closed. ^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L.303 (A.P) M PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANTIREGISTRAR N OFFICER
The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Kakinada Circle, D. No. 10- 355 3'"' Floor, Commercial Taxes Department, Pithpuram Road, Kakinada, Kakinada District, Andhra Pradesh^^ 2 The Principal Secretary to the Government, Revenue (CT) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.
The Secretary (Finance), Union of India, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi- 110001. 4. One CC to Sri G. Narendra Chetty, Advocate [OPUC] ^ ^ ^
Two CCs to GP for Commercial Tax, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 6. cSe CC to Sri P. Ponna Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of India (OPUC)
Three C.D. Copies. //// S To, Cnr
HIGH COURT DATED:08/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.31473of 2024 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.