Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged an order dated 27.06.2023 passed by the first respondent, an officer of the Commercial Tax Department administering GST, on the ground that the impugned proceedings had not been signed by the issuing authority. The writ petition came up before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, with the petitioner's counsel pointing out that an identical issue had already been decided by a Coordinate Bench of the same Court in W.P.No.2830 of 2023, disposed of on 14.02.2023, wherein the Coordinate Bench had set aside an unsigned assessment order along with the connected FORM GST DRC-07, show cause notice and FORM GST DRC-01 issued for the tax periods 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, while granting the department liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an order passed by a GST authority in discharge of statutory functions, but not bearing the signature of the issuing officer, constitutes a valid order in the eye of law.
  2. Whether such an unsigned order can be sustained merely because the omission is an inadvertent error.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned proceedings/order had not been signed by the authority who passed it.
  • Relied on the ruling of the Coordinate Bench in W.P.No.2830 of 2023, where an identical defect had led to an unsigned order being set aside.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax contended that an inadvertent error, such as omission of a signature, cannot be a ground to nullify the entire proceedings.
  • Submitted that at best the proceedings should be returned to the authority as being inequitable, and the relief of quashing sought by the petitioner should be rejected.

Court Order/Findings

  • Noted that the earlier Coordinate Bench ruling in W.P.No.2830 of 2023 revolved around a similar issue and had taken the view that the matter required to be relegated to the authorities for conclusion in accordance with law.
  • Held that in the absence of a signature appended to an order passed in discharge of statutory duties and required to be signed by the authority, the impugned proceedings do not tantamount to an order in the eye of law.
  • Agreeing with the Coordinate Bench, allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order dated 27.06.2023.
  • Clarified that the order would not preclude the respondents from proceeding afresh in accordance with law; no order as to costs.

Important Clarification

  • An unsigned order passed by a GST authority in discharge of statutory duties has no legal existence and cannot be treated as a valid order, irrespective of whether the omission was inadvertent.
  • Setting aside an unsigned order does not bar the department from initiating or continuing proceedings afresh in accordance with law; it merely nullifies the specific unsigned instrument.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – governs determination of tax not paid, short paid or erroneously refunded, under which the impugned proceedings were initiated.
  • Rule 26 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 – prescribes the manner of authentication of documents, notices and orders issued under the GST law, including the requirement of a valid signature.

Decision – In Favour of

Decided in favour of the Assessee — the impugned unsigned order was set aside, though the department retains liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
  • Case No.: WRIT PETITION No.33211 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Justice G. Narendar and Justice Nyapathy Vijay
  • Decision Date: 27-12-2023
  • Disposal Nature: Allowed; impugned order set aside for want of signature

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (PDF)

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.