APHC010438682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3554] WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 23349/2025 Between: 1. KHADIR ENETRPRISES, REPRESENTED BY THE PROPRIETORSRI ABDUL KHADIR SHAIK DOOR NO 422, 423, 424, 425, PHASE 1,2, AUTO NAGAR, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH. PIN - 522001. ...PETITIONER AND 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, KOTHAPET CIRCLE GUNTUR-LL DIVISION, D.NO 11-1-73/1,4TH FLOOR, VASUNDHARA BLDGS RAJAJI BHAVAN,JINNA TOWER CENTER,GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH-522001 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF A.P. REVENUE (CT) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR (DISTRICT), AP, PIN -522 503 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, setting aside the impugned claimed common Intimation of Tax Ascertained in Part-A of the Form GST DRC-01A, the claimed show-cause Notice and its claimed summary in Form GST DRC-01 2 RRR,J & CGR,J W.P.No.23349 of 2025 both dated 08- 07-2024, the 2 claimed personal hearing Notices dated 20-09- 2024 and dated 06- 11-2024 and the claimed adjudication order and its alleged summary in Form GST DRC-07 both dated 04-04-2025 and the proceedings issued under Section 74 of the GST Acts, 2017 by the Respondent No1 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay the collection of the disputed interest of Rs.2,49,517; and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of Justice, lest the Petitioner will be put to irreparable economic loss. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 3 RRR,J & CGR,J W.P.No.23349 of 2025 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner was served with an assessment order, vide Reference No.ZD3704250059491, dated 04.04.2025, passed by the 1st respondent, under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the GST Act’), for the tax period April, 2020 – March, 2021. This assessment order has been challenged by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition. 2. This impugned order, is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceeding did not contain the signature of the Assessing Officer. 3. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that, there is no signature of the Assessing Officer, on the impugned order. 4. The effect of the absence of the signature, on an assessment order was earlier considered by this Court, in the case of A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), in W.P.No.2830 of 2023, decided on 14.02.2023. A Division Bench of this Court, had held that the signature, on the assessment order, cannot be dispensed with and that the provisions of Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, would not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment, another Division Bench of this Court, in the case of M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant 4 RRR,J & CGR,J W.P.No.23349 of 2025 Commissioner, in W.P.No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023, had set aside the impugned assessment order. 5. Another Division Bench of this Court by its Judgment, dated 19.03.2024, in the case of M/s. SRS Traders Vs The. Assistant Commissioner ST & ors, in W.P.No.5238 of 2024, following the aforesaid two Judgments, had held that the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the assessment order, would render the assessment order invalid and set aside the said order. 6. Following the aforesaid Judgments, the impugned assessment order would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the Assessing Officer, on this impugned order. 7. This Court is also cognizant of the fact that the impugned order has been passed some time back and the present Writ Petition has been filed with delay. However, Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 stipulates that service of notice or orders, without signature, would not amount to service at all. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras in T.V.L. Deepa Traders vs. The Deputy Commissioner (W.P.No.19277 of 2024, dated 13.08.2024) had held the same view. Consequently, there is no service of the impugned order even as of today, on account of the absence of signature on the impugned proceeding. In those circumstances, the delay in approaching this Court, would not a relevant factor. 5 RRR,J & CGR,J W.P.No.23349 of 2025 8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order, vide Reference No.ZD3704250059491, dated 04.04.2025, passed by the 1st respondent, with a liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving a notice and by assigning a signature to the said Order. The period from the date of the impugned Order, till the date of receipt of this Order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ________________________ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J Date:10.09.2025 KPV 6 RRR,J & CGR,J W.P.No.23349 of 2025 255 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION No:23349 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 10.09.2025 KPV