Maddala Industries Vs Assistant Commissioner (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Unsigned GST Orders Held Invalid Since Signature Requirement Cannot Be Dispensed With; GST Assessment Orders Quashed Due to Missing DIN and Defective Service of Notice; Portal Upload Alone Not Sufficient to Cure Invalid GST Orders; Andhra Pradesh HC Allows Delayed GST Challenge Because Unsigned Orders Were Never Properly Served.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court considered a batch of writ petitions challenging assessment orders issued in Form GST DRC-07 dated 24.11.2021 under the GST Act for the tax period 2020-2021. The petitioner challenged the assessment orders on several grounds, including that the impugned orders did not contain the signature of the assessing officer and also lacked a Document Identification Number (DIN).
The Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes admitted, on instructions, that the impugned summary assessment orders did not contain either the assessing officer’s signature or a DIN number.
The Court referred to earlier judgments of the Andhra Pradesh High Court on the issue of unsigned assessment orders. In prior decisions, including A.V. Bhanoji Row, SRK Enterprises, and SRS Traders, Division Benches had held that the signature of the assessing officer on an assessment order is mandatory and cannot be dispensed with. The Court also noted that Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act would not cure such a defect. In those cases, assessment orders lacking signatures had been set aside.
