Facts of the Case

M/s. Sri Krishna Traders was served with an assessment order dated 29.04.2024 in Form GST DRC-07 for the financial year 2018-19, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST). The petitioner challenged the order on several grounds, most significantly that it carried neither a Document Identification Number (DIN) nor the signature of the assessing officer. On instructions, the Government Pleader for Commercial Tax confirmed before the Court that the impugned order indeed bore no DIN and no signature.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an unsigned GST assessment order lacking a DIN is a valid order in the eye of law, or whether it can be cured under Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act, 2017.
  2. Whether the delay in filing the writ petition against such an order is a relevant consideration when the order was never validly served in the first place.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner contended the absence of a DIN and signature rendered the assessment order void and unenforceable, relying on a consistent line of Division Bench precedents of the same High Court.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, conceded that the impugned order carried neither a DIN nor the assessing officer's signature.

Court Order / Findings

  • Relying on its own precedents in A.V. Bhanoji Row vs The Assistant Commissioner (ST), M/s. SRK Enterprises vs Assistant Commissioner, and M/s. SRS Traders vs The Assistant Commissioner, the Court reiterated that the signature of the assessing officer on an assessment order cannot be dispensed with, and Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act do not cure such a defect.
  • The Court also invoked Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, and the Madras High Court's ruling in T.V.L. Deepa Traders, holding that service of a notice or order without signature does not amount to service at all — so the delay in approaching the Court was not a relevant factor since limitation never began to run.
  • The impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29.04.2024 was set aside, with liberty to the respondent to conduct a fresh assessment after notice and with a duly signed order; the period between the impugned order and receipt of this order was excluded for limitation purposes.

Important Clarification

  • An unsigned GST order without a DIN is treated as non-est — not merely voidable — and Sections 160/169 (procedural-defect saving provisions) cannot rescue it; because such an order is never validly served, delay in challenging it does not run against the assessee.

Sections Involved

  • Section 160, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – saving of proceedings for mistake, defect or omission not affecting the substance of the matter.
  • Section 169, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – modes of service of notices/orders.
  • Rule 26(3), CGST Rules, 2017 – requirement of authentication for validity of service.

Decision – In Favour of

Allowed; entirely in favour of the Assessee, with the assessment order set aside and fresh assessment permitted only with a properly signed order.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
  • Case No.: W.P.No.18845 of 2025
  • Coram: Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice T.C.D. Sekhar
  • Date of Order: 12.09.2025

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.