Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Konda Reddy Mangunuru, challenged proceedings dated 25.10.2024 and the consequential Order for Cancellation of Registration dated 25.11.2024 in Form GST REG-19, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Nandigama Circle, under the CGST/APGST Act, 2017, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration with retrospective effect from 31.08.2024. The petitioner challenged the cancellation on multiple grounds, prominently including that the impugned proceedings did not bear a Document Identification Number (DIN), rendering them invalid as per the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs' own circular and binding Supreme Court precedent.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a GST registration cancellation order that does not bear a Document Identification Number is valid and enforceable.
  2. What consequential relief follows where the impugned order is found non-est for want of a DIN.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned cancellation proceedings did not contain a DIN number, contrary to the CBIC's Circular No.128/47/2019-GST dated 23.12.2019 mandating DIN generation for GST communications.
  • Per the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India, an order lacking a DIN is non-est and invalid in law.
  • The retrospective cancellation with effect from 31.08.2024 was arbitrary and violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and principles of natural justice.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, candidly conceded that there was no DIN number on the impugned order.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India, which held that any order not bearing a DIN number is non-est and invalid, as well as coordinate Division Bench rulings of the same High Court in Cluster Enterprises and Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors applying the same CBIC circular to set aside DIN-less orders.
  • In view of the admitted absence of a DIN number on the impugned cancellation order, the Court set aside the proceedings dated 25.11.2024, disposing of the writ petition with liberty to the respondent to take up fresh proceedings after issuing proper notice to the petitioner and assigning a valid DIN number to any fresh order.
  • No order as to costs was made, and pending applications were closed.

Important Clarification

  • Following Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India and the CBIC's Circular No.128/47/2019-GST, any GST order, notice or communication issued without a Document Identification Number is treated as non-est and invalid, regardless of its substantive content.
  • Such an infirmity results in the order being set aside with liberty to the department to reinitiate proceedings with proper notice and a valid DIN, rather than a final closure of the matter on merits.

Sections Involved

  • Section 29, CGST/APGST Act, 2017 – cancellation of registration, the substantive provision underlying the impugned order.
  • CBIC Circular No.128/47/2019-GST dated 23.12.2019 – mandates generation of a Document Identification Number for all GST communications.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the assessee — the DIN-less cancellation order was set aside, with liberty to the department to reinitiate proceedings with a valid DIN.

Case Details

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; W.P.No.17322 of 2025; Coram: Hon'ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao and Hon'ble Smt Justice Sumathi Jagadam; Date: 16.07.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.