Facts of the Case

M/s Sree Varalakshmi Transports was served with an assessment order dated 20.08.2024 in Form GST DRC-07, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Kadapa-I Circle, for the tax period April 2021 to March 2022, under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner challenged the order primarily on the ground that it bore no signature of the assessing officer. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, on instructions, confirmed that the assessing officer's signature was indeed absent from the impugned proceeding. The petitioner had approached the High Court after some delay, but contended this was of no consequence since an unsigned order is deemed to be no service at all.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an assessment order passed under the GST Act without the signature of the assessing officer is valid, and whether Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act can cure such a defect.
  2. Whether delay in filing the writ petition against an unsigned order is a relevant consideration, given that Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules deems such service to be no service at all.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The absence of signature on the assessment order rendered the DRC-07 proceeding invalid and non-est in law.
  • Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act, which deal with rectification of errors and modes of service, cannot be pressed into service to cure the fundamental defect of an unsigned order.
  • Since Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules treats service of an unsigned order as no service, the delay in approaching the Court was not a relevant factor and could not be held against the petitioner.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, on instructions, candidly admitted that there was no signature of the assessing officer on the impugned assessment order.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court relied on its own Division Bench precedents — A.V. Bhanoji Row vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (2023), M/s. SRK Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner (2023), and M/s. SRS Traders vs. The Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors. (2024) — all holding that absence of signature on an assessment order renders it invalid, and Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act do not rectify such a defect.
  • The Court further relied on Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and the Madras High Court ruling in T.V.L. Deepa Traders vs. The Deputy Commissioner (2024) to hold that service of an unsigned order does not amount to service at all, so the delay in filing the writ was not a relevant factor.
  • The impugned assessment order dated 20.08.2024 was set aside, with liberty to the department to conduct a fresh assessment after issuing proper notice and assigning a signature to the order, and the intervening period was excluded for limitation purposes.

Important Clarification

  • An assessment order under the GST Act that lacks the assessing officer's signature is invalid in law; the curative provisions of Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act cannot save such an order, following a consistent line of Andhra Pradesh High Court precedent.
  • Because Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules deems service of an unsigned order to be no service at all, the limitation clock for challenging it effectively does not start running, insulating the assessee from a delay objection.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73/DRC-07, CGST Act, 2017 & Rules — assessment order format for demand of tax not involving fraud.
  • Rule 26(3), CGST Rules, 2017 — deems any notice/order issued without signature as not served.
  • Sections 160 & 169, CGST Act, 2017 — provisions on validity of assessment proceedings and modes of service, held inapplicable to cure an unsigned order.

Decision – In Favour of

The decision is in favour of the assessee (Sree Varalakshmi Transports). The unsigned assessment order was set aside, with liberty to the department to redo the assessment after curing the defect.

Case Details

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; Writ Petition No. 35657/2025; Coram: Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Hon'ble Sri Justice T.C.D. Sekhar; Order dated 31.12.2025.

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.