APHC010711932025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 81/2026 Between: 1. THAMMISETTY VENKATA SRINIVASULU, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. THAMMISETTY VENKATA SRINIVASULU. S R NAGAR COLONY, BASINENIPALLE, UDAYAGIRI MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, PIN 524226. ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, KAVALI CIRCLE, KAVALI, NELLORE DIVISION. 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, NELLORE DIVISION, NELLORE. 3. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, 12-468-4, ADJ. TO NH- 16, SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANAPALLI-522 501, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY(FINANCE), MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. ...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 Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent as arbitrary and 2 contrary to the provisions of the Act and judicial pronouncements, and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to re-issue the order by granting the reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 direct the 1st Respondent to pass appropriate orders for the tax periods 2023-24 and stay the further proceedings to recover the impugned demand of Rs. 16,28,459/- as otherwise, the petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. IA NO: 2 OF 2026 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 may be pleased to issue any order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in passing the impugned summary of order without Order Reference No. (for short >RFN) or DIN and no signature is affixed on the impugned order, vide DRC-07 dated 13.03.2025 for the tax period 2023-2024 under the APGST/CGST Act, 2017, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Act and quash the impugned order for having no signature affixed on it, digitally or manually, the same is invalid and would not vest the jurisdictional proper officer with any further jurisdiction to proceed to pass the impugned order and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C SANJEEVA RAO 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) The petitioner was served with an order of assessment, in FORM GST DRC-07, dated 13.03.2025, passed by the 1st respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short <the GST Act=] for the period 2023-24. This order has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition. 2. This order of assessment is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceeding does not contain the signature of the assessing officer. 3. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned order of assessment. 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 Commissioner, in W.P.No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023, had set aside the impugned assessment order. 4 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 order of assessment would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned order. 7. This Court is also cogent of the fact that the impugned order of assessment has been issued 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 the case of 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 be a relevant factor. 8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned order of assessment, dated 13.03.2025, issued by the 1st respondent, with liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, 5 after giving notice and by assigning a signature to the said order of assessment. The period from the date of the impugned order of assessment, 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 ________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date: 28.01.2026 BSM 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.: 81/2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 28.01.2026 BSM