Facts of the Case

M/s. SR Fertilizers and Pesticides was served with an assessment order dated 28.10.2024 passed under Section 74(11) of the CGST and SGST Acts, 2017 for the tax period 2023-24, raising tax, interest and penalty. The petitioner challenged the order primarily on the ground that it did not bear any Document Identification Number (DIN), besides other grounds alleging failure to establish mens rea and violation of natural justice and constitutional provisions.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a GST assessment order passed without generating a DIN number is valid in law.
  2. Consequential relief where such an order is set aside — whether fresh proceedings can be initiated and, if so, subject to what safeguards on limitation.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned order under Section 74(11) did not carry any DIN number, making it arbitrary, without authority of law, and contrary to Section 74 and the principles of natural justice.
  • The action was violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 265 and 300-A of the Constitution.

Respondent's Arguments

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

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India (2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC)), which held that a GST order lacking a DIN number is non-est and invalid, based on CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST.
  • Followed two Division Bench precedents of the same Court — M/s. Cluster Enterprises v. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa and Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors v. The Deputy Commissioner — both holding that non-mention of a DIN vitiates the proceedings.
  • The impugned assessment order dated 28.10.2024 was set aside, with liberty to the Assessing Officer to conduct a fresh assessment after issuing notice to the petitioner and assigning a proper DIN number.
  • The period from the date of the impugned order until receipt of the High Court's order was excluded for limitation purposes.

Important Clarification

  • A GST assessment or adjudication order that does not bear a Document Identification Number is non-est and invalid, regardless of its merits, in line with the CBIC's own circular and the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal — this remains a settled, frequently-applied ground for setting aside GST orders in Andhra Pradesh.
  • Setting aside for want of DIN does not bar the Department from re-initiating proceedings; the limitation clock is tolled for the intervening period so that fresh proceedings remain within time.

Sections Involved

  • Section 74(11), CGST/SGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax involving fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.
  • CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST — mandating generation of a DIN on all communications issued by GST field officers.

Decision – In Favour of

The order is in favour of the Assessee. The assessment order was set aside for want of a DIN number, though the Department retains liberty to re-assess with the procedural defect cured.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 14558 of 2025
Coram: Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Hon'ble Smt. Justice Sumathi Jagadam
Date of Order: 2nd 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.