Radha Madhav Automobiles Private Limited Vs State of Andhra Pradesh and Others (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Andhra Pradesh High Court addressed a writ petition filed by Radha Madhav Automobiles Private Limited challenging GST assessment orders issued in Form GST DRC-07 (dated 12.01.2022) and Form GST DRC-08 (dated 18.01.2022). The primary contention was the absence of the assessing officer’s signature and the Document Identification Number (DIN) on the assessment orders, rendering them procedurally flawed.
The court referred to multiple precedents that reinforced the necessity of these procedural elements. In V. Bhanoji Row Vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST), the High Court had earlier ruled that the absence of the assessing officer’s signature on an assessment order cannot be rectified under Sections 160 and 169 of the GST Act. Similarly, judgments in M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner and M/s. SRS Traders Vs. Assistant Commissioner reiterated that unsigned assessment orders are invalid and must be set aside.
The issue of non-mention of the DIN was also pivotal. The Supreme Court in Pradeep Goyal Vs. Union of India & Ors highlighted that a GST order without a DIN is non-est in law. The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST) and Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors Vs. Deputy Commissioner (ST), further affirmed that non-mention of the DIN violates procedural mandates as outlined in the CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST, dated 23.12.2019.
Given these precedents and the CBIC circular, the High Court declared the impugned assessment orders invalid. The court set aside the orders and granted the assessing officer liberty to conduct fresh assessments after issuing proper notices and ensuring procedural compliance. The judgment also excluded the period from the date of the impugned orders to the receipt of the High Court’s order from the limitation period for reassessment.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
