Unsigned & DIN-Less GST Orders are Invalid: AP HC Ruling

Summary: The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in Venlcata Durga Malleswara Traders vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (WPC 4314 OF 2025), ruled that a GST assessment order lacking a proper signature and Document Identification Number (DIN) is legally invalid. The petitioner challenged an assessment order for FY 2017-18, arguing that the absence of a signature and DIN violated CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST. The court referred to previous rulings, including V. Bhanoji Row (2023) and SRK Enterprises (2023), which also emphasized that unsigned orders are unenforceable. Additionally, the Supreme Court in Pradeep Goyal (2022) confirmed that orders without a DIN are void. The High Court set aside the order, allowing tax authorities to reissue a valid one. This ruling reinforces the necessity of signed and properly documented GST orders to ensure compliance with procedural requirements. Businesses should challenge orders lacking these elements to avoid legal complications.

Signature and DIN are Essential Components of Valid GST Assessment Orders and Notices – Andhra Pradesh High Court Strikes Down Unsigned and DIN-Less GST Orders:

The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in the case of Venlcata Durga Malleswara Traders vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Others (WPC 4314 OF 2025), has once again ruled in favour of the importance of Signature of proper authority and Maintenance of in GST assessments notices and orders. The Court ruled that any assessment order without a valid signature and a Document Identification Number (DIN) is invalid and unenforceable.

The petitioner, Venlcata Durga Malleswara Traders, received an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 on 28.12.2023 from the Assistant Commissioner (ST) for the period 2017-18. The order copy lacked the signature of the assessing officer and did not contain a DIN. The petitioner challenged the order before the Andhra Pradesh High Court, citing various grounds including this two important point which are:

1. Lack of a valid signature in the order copy made the order legally unenforceable.

2. Non quotation of a DIN in the order copy violated the government CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST, which mandates that all GST communications must carry a DIN.

The petitioner cited many case references in support of their arguments like

1. A.V. Bhanoji Row vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (WP 2830/2023, decided on 14.02.2023)​: In this case The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that an unsigned assessment order is invalid and that Sections 160 & 169 of the CGST Act, 2017 cannot cure such defects (Both Section given below for ready reference).In this case, department issued single DRC-07 notice for three tax period i.e. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 which can be another ground for objection.

2. M/s. SRK Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (WP 29397/2023, decided on 10.11.2023): – The Court again ruled that merely uploading an unsigned order on the GST portal does not validate the order, as department argued that only a competent authority can upload the order copy in the GST portal so it implies no signature is required, which overruled by the court by saying that here section 169 is not in the question i.e. mode of service of notice to the assessee. The judgment held that Section 160 of the CGST Act does not apply to unsigned orders, as the omission in signing the order is not a minor defect but a fundamental error in the eyes of Law. Here in this case, department issued the show cause notice is on one ground and the order has been passed on different ground which was also objected by the petitioner M/s. SRK Enterprises.

3. M/s. SRS Traders vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (WP 5238/2024, decided on 19.03.2024)​: The Court followed the SRK Enterprises ruling, again confirming that a lack of a signature in the order or notice copy will invalidates the said order or notice by the department.

4. Pradeep Goyal vs. Union of India (WP 320/2022, Supreme Court)​: This case is very important as in this case, The Supreme Court after noticing the provisions of the Act and the circular issued by the CBIC, ruled and confirmed that any order without a DIN is non-est (legally non-existent) and unenforceable by the law.

5. The CBIC had issued Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST, mandating that all GST communications must carry a DIN​.

6. The High court set aside that the assessment order dated 28.12.2023 and granted liberty to the tax authorities to issue a fresh assessment order, ensuring proper compliance with GST procedural requirements as per the CBIC circulars and guidelines of the Supreme Court.

Opinion

1. Any GST order must be signed by the assessing officer to become legally valid in the eye of Law and one of major ground for obhection.

2. All GST orders and communications should carry a DIN as per CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST, if not then not valid and should be challenged.

3. Single notice or order by clubbing of more than one financial year should be challenged

4. The show cause notice is on one ground and the order has been passed on different ground should be objected by the assessee.

Case details, circulars and sections for ready recap.

Section 160. Assessment proceedings, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds-

(1) No assessment, re-assessment, adjudication, review, revision, appeal, rectification, notice, summons or other proceedings done, accepted, made, issued, initiated, or purported to have been done, accepted, made, issued, initiated in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or deemed to be invalid merely by reason of any mistake, defect or omission therein, if such assessment, re-assessment, adjudication, review, revision, appeal, rectification, notice, summons or other proceedings are in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intents, purposes and requirements of this Act or any existing law.

(2) The service of any notice, order or communication shall not be called in question, if the notice, order or communication, as the case may be, has already been acted upon by the person to whom it is issued or where such service has not been called in question at or in the earlier proceedings commenced, continued or finalised pursuant to such notice, order or communication.

Section 169. Service of notice in certain circumstances. –

(1) Any decision, order, summons, notice or other communication under this Act or the rules made thereunder shall be served by any one of the following methods, namely: –

• by giving or tendering it directly or by a messenger including a courier to the addressee or the taxable person or to his manager or authorised representative or an advocate or a tax practitioner holding authority to appear in the proceedings on behalf of the taxable person or to a person regularly employed by him in connection with the business, or to any adult member of family residing with the taxable person; or
• by registered post or speed post or courier with acknowledgement due, to the person for whom it is intended or his authorised representative, if any, at his last known place of business or residence; or
• by sending a communication to his e-mail address provided at the time of registration or as amended from time to time; or
• by making it available on the common portal; or
• by publication in a newspaper circulating in the locality in which the taxable person or the person to whom it is issued is last known to have resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain; or
• if none of the modes aforesaid is practicable, by affixing it in some conspicuous place at his last known place of business or residence and if such mode is not practicable for any reason, then by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of the office of the concerned officer or authority who or which passed such decision or order or issued such summons or notice.

(2) Every decision, order, summons, notice or any communication shall be deemed to have been served on the date on which it is tendered or published or a copy thereof is affixed in the manner provided in sub-section (1).

(3) When such decision, order, summons, notice or any communication is sent by registered post or speed post, it shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee at the expiry of the period normally taken by such post in transit unless the contrary is proved.

*****

Disclaimer: The suggestions provided in this article are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal, financial, or professional advice. Readers are encouraged to consult with a qualified expert or professional before making any decisions based on the information shared. The author and publisher are not responsible for any actions taken based on the suggestions presented.