Case Law Details
Raam Autobahn India Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner and Others (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Summary: The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in Raam Autobahn India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner [W.P. No. 10549 of 2023], ruled that assessment orders issued without a Document Identification Number (DIN) are invalid. The decision was based on the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST dated 23.12.2019, which mandates that all GST communications, including assessment orders, must contain a DIN. The court set aside the impugned assessment order and directed the Respondent to conduct a fresh assessment while ensuring compliance with the DIN requirement. The case arose when Raam Autobahn India (P.) Ltd. challenged an assessment order dated November 16, 2022, for the period from July to September 2017, citing the absence of a DIN. The High Court examined previous judicial precedents, including Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India & Ors. [W.P. (C) No. 320 of 2022], in which the Supreme Court held that orders without a DIN are non-est and invalid. The Andhra Pradesh High Court also relied on M/s. Cluster Enterprises v. Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa and Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors v. Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam, which reaffirmed that the absence of a DIN invalidates the order. The court emphasized that compliance with the CBIC Circular is mandatory, and non-mention of a DIN undermines the validity of tax proceedings. It held that the impugned order uploaded on the GST portal must be set aside, and the Respondent must conduct a fresh assessment, ensuring due notice to the Petitioner. The period from the date of filing the Writ Petition to the date of its disposal would be excluded from the limitation period for passing the new assessment order. This ruling reinforces the importance of procedural compliance in tax administration and aligns with previous judicial interpretations emphasizing DIN as a necessary safeguard against unauthorized tax orders. The decision in Habrik Infra v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) further supports this position, as it held that orders lacking a DIN must be set aside. The Andhra Pradesh High Court’s verdict upholds taxpayer rights and ensures adherence to regulatory directives in GST proceedings.
Facts:
M/s. Raam Autobahn India (P.) Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) was served with an assessment order dated November 16, 2022 (“the Impugned Order”) for the period from July, 2017 to September, 2017 by the Assistant Commissioner (“the Respondent”).
The Impugned Order is challenged by the Petitioner on the ground that the Impugned Order did not contain DIN number which is a mandatory as per the Circular.
Issue:
Whether an assessment order issued without a DIN is valid?
Held:
The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 10549 of 2023 held as under:
- Relied on the case of Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India & Ors [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 320 of 2022 dated July 18, 2022] wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court after noticing the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) and the Circular issued by the CBIC, had held that an order, which does not contain a DIN number would be non-est and invalid.
- Further relied on the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises v. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)- 2, Kadapa [Writ Petition Nos. 13375 & 140450 of 2024 dated July 24, 2024] wherein the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court on the basis of the Circular had held that non-mention of a DIN number would mitigate against the validity of such proceedings. Another Division Bench of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors v. The Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam, [Writ Petition No. 12201 of 2024 dated June 6, 2024] had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.
- Held that, the Impugned Order which was uploaded on the portal requires to be set aside. The Respondent was asked to conduct a fresh assessment after issuing a valid order with a DIN, ensuring due notice to the Petitioner. The period from the date of filing of the Writ Petition to the date of disposal of the Writ Petition shall be excluded for the purpose of calculating the limitation available for passing the assessment order. There shall be no order as to costs.
Our Comments:
The Circular states that DIN shall be done in respect of all communications including e-mails sent to tax payers and other concerned persons by any office of the CBIC across the country.
In a pari materia case of Habrik Infra v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Writ Petition No. 496 of 2024 dated January 22, 2025) wherein the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh relied on Supreme Court as well as Division Benches of instant Court had held that an order which did not contain a DIN would be non-est and would mitigate against validity of such proceedings. In view of same, impugned assessment order was to be set aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
The petitioner was served with an assessment order vide Reference No.DIN3716112261960, dated 16.11.2022, passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”] for the periods July, 2017 to September, 2017. This assessment order of the 1st respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition.
2. This assessment order vide Reference No.DIN3716112261960, is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned assessment order.
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 Goyal Vs. Union of India & Ors1. 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.
5. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa 2, 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 mitigate against the validity of such proceedings. Another Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors Vs. The Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam3, had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.
6. 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.
7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned proceedings vide Reference DIN3716112261960, dated 16.11.2022, issued by the 1st respondent, with liberty to the 1st 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 purpose of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
Notes:
1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC)
2 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)
*****
(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)
Author Bio
