Siri Constructions Vs Assistant Commissionerst (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
The petitioner challenged an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 26.04.2024, passed under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the financial year April 2018 to March 2019. The principal challenge was that the summary assessment order did not bear the signature of the Assessing Officer. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, on instructions, admitted that the impugned assessment order did not contain the Assessing Officer’s signature.
The Court referred to its earlier decisions in V. Bhanoji Row v. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (W.P. No.2830 of 2023, decided on 14.02.2023), M/s. SRK Enterprises v. Assistant Commissioner (W.P. No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023), and M/s. SRS Traders v. The Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors. (W.P. No.5238 of 2024, decided on 19.03.2024). Those decisions held that an assessment order must bear the signature of the Assessing Officer, that such a defect cannot be cured by Sections 160 and 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and that an unsigned assessment order is invalid. Following those judgments, the Court held that the impugned summary assessment order was liable to be set aside due to the absence of the Assessing Officer’s signature.
