Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s. M VV Satyanarayana, a registered partnership firm represented by its partner Shri Mandavilli Bhima Shanker, was served with an assessment order dated 26.03.2024 in FORM GST DRC-07, bearing Order No. ZD370324024006U, passed by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST), Nandyal-II Circle, under the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari quashing the order as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice, along with an interim application to stay all further recovery and penalty proceedings pending disposal of the writ petition. The challenge was raised on several grounds, but the ground that ultimately decided the case was that the impugned proceedings did not bear a Document Identification Number (DIN).

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an assessment order passed under the GST Act without a Document Identification Number is valid and enforceable.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned assessment order in FORM GST DRC-07 did not contain a DIN, rendering it invalid in light of settled precedent requiring such a number on all GST proceedings.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, admitted that there was indeed no DIN number on the impugned assessment order.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Pradeep Goyal vs. Union of India & Ors., which, after examining the CBIC circular on the subject, held that an order without a DIN would be non-est and invalid.
  • It further relied on Division Bench rulings of the same Court in M/s. Cluster Enterprises vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa and Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors vs. The Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam, both holding that non-mention of a DIN mitigates against the validity of the proceedings and requires the order to be set aside.
  • The impugned assessment order dated 26.03.2024 was set aside on this ground alone.
  • The Court granted liberty to the second respondent to conduct a fresh assessment after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN to the fresh order, and directed that the period between the impugned order and receipt of this order be excluded for limitation purposes.

Important Clarification

  • A GST assessment order passed without a Document Identification Number is treated as non-est and invalid, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal and the CBIC circular mandating DIN generation for all communications; this defect alone is sufficient to set aside the order regardless of its merits.
  • Setting aside on this technical ground is generally accompanied by liberty to conduct a fresh assessment with a proper DIN, and the intervening period is excluded from limitation so that the revenue is not left remediless.
  • This ground travels independently of the other grounds urged in the petition — such as the rate of tax or the natural-justice challenge — and courts will dispose of the matter on the DIN defect alone without going into those other contentions once conceded by the department.

Sections Involved

  • FORM GST DRC-07 – summary of the order confirming demand after adjudication.
  • CBIC Circular on Document Identification Number (DIN) – mandates a DIN on all communications issued by GST authorities to taxpayers.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of in favour of the Assessee — the assessment order was set aside for absence of DIN, with liberty to the department to conduct a fresh assessment with a proper DIN.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
  • Case No.: Writ Petition No. 14368 of 2025
  • Case ID: APHC010284912025
  • Coram: Hon'ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao and Hon'ble Smt Justice Sumathi Jagadam
  • Date of Order: 2 July 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.