APHC010607542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 31351/2025 Between: 1. MAATA ASIRITALLI SERVICES, REPRESENTED BY SHRI. VENKATARAO MAHANTHI, FLAT NO. 101, DNO. 4-72-4/4, SAI TIRUMALA CHALLA MANSIONS, LAWSONS BAY COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 017. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, (ST) CHINA WALTAIR CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM -1 DIVISION, D NO. 1-106/13, KAVI HOUSE, SECTOR 8, MVP COLONY VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 017. . 2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER ST, APPELLATE AUTHORITY, VIJAYAWADA, D NO. 40-5-19/9B, BACK OF NVKR TOWERS MOGALRAJAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520 010. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI. 4. UNION OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE) NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction, or order A. Quashing the proceedings of the 1st Respondent in Assessment Order issued in Form GST DRC-07 dated 12.02.2025 under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017, without containing a Document identification Number (DIN), without granting the opportunity of statutory period of 30 days to respond to the SCN as mandated u/s 73(8), without providing an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner, without providing the statutory time of three months for filing reply to the SCN, and without existence of the commercial transaction as being arbitrary, without jurisdiction, unconstitutional, unreasonable, in contravention of Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2017, violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the GST Act, 2017, in violation to Article 14, 246A, 265, 19(1)(g), 300A of the Constitution of India B. Quashing the proceedings of the 2nd Respondent in Endorsement dated 20.09.2025 vide A.O. No. DIN3720092526531 rejecting the appeal filed by the Petitioner on the ground of limitation and condoning the delay of 86 days in filing the appeal in view of the severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (CQPD) with bilateral pneumonia suffered by the partner of the Petitioner. C. 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 proceedings of the 1st Respondent in Assessment Order issued in Form GST DRC-07 dated 12.02.2025 under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ANIL KUMAR BEZAWADA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 2. 3 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri Anil Bezawada, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner was served with an assessment order in FORM GST DRC-07, dated 12.02.2025, passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short <the GST Act=], for the financial year 2023-2024. This assessment order of the 1st respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition. 3. This assessment order is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said order did not contain a DIN number. 4. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned assessment order in FORM GST DRC-07, dated 12.02.2025. 5. The question of the effect of non-inclusion of DIN number on the order, 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 & Ors 1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, after noticing the provisions of the Act and the circular issued 1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) 4 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 invalid. 6. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. 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, Visakhapatnam 3 , had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside. 7. In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., non-mention of a DIN number in the order, which was uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned order to be set aside. 8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order, dated 12.02.2025 in FORM GST DRC-07, 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 summary of the assessment order, till 2 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.) 3 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.) 5 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 ________________ T.C.D.SEKHAR, J Date 31.12.2025 KA 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 31351/2025 Date 31.12.2025 KA