Contd… APHC010527922024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3494] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 27571/2024 Between: M/s.kvr Vcpl Jv, ...PETITIONER AND The Appellant Authority And Additional Commissioner St and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Mr. Venkatram Reddy Mantur Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following Order: (per NJS,J) The present writ petition is filed seeking following relief:- “…to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in rejecting the appeal filed by the Petitioner under Section 107 of the Act, as the 1st Respondent has no power to condone the delay beyond four months, and the Summary of the Order in FORM GST DRC-07 of the 2nd Respondent, dated 25.04.2023 passed for the tax period April,2020 to March, 2021 uploaded in the GST portal without either physically nor digitally signed which is contrary in Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, as legally unenforceable and non-est in the eye of law and set-aside the same, and as illegal arbitrary ab initio void contrary to the provisions of CGST Act and Rules 2017 under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and the State Goods and Service Tax Act 2017, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the CGST/SGST Act 2017, without jurisdiction and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently set aside the Endorsement Proceedings of the 1st Respondent, dated 30.07.2024 uploaded in the GST Portal and Summary of the Order, dated 25.04.2023 of the 2nd Respondent and pass such other order or orders…” NJS,J & JS,J W.P No.27571 of 2024 2 Contd… 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. Counsel on both sides states that the matter is covered by the earlier orders of different Benches. 3. 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 in the case of M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, in W.P.No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023, had set aside the impugned assessment order. 4. 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. 5. In a recent decision dated 18.12.2024, a Division Bench of this Court, allowed W.P No.28720 of 2024 in similar circumstances. NJS,J & JS,J W.P No.27571 of 2024 3 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 the impugned assessment order. Consequently, the endorsement of the 1st respondent in the appeal against a non-est order in the eye of law is also not sustainable. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 25.04.2023, and the Endorsement dated 30.07.2024, with liberty to the 2nd respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a signature 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 purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 05.02.2025 Ksj