An Order without a DIN is non-est and invalid

The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of RAAM AUTOBAHN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS - 2025 (2) TMI 931 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT set aside the assessment order for non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of a Document Identification Number (“DIN”) and held that as per the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (“CBIC”)Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST dated December 23, 2019(“the Circular”), any GST order issued without a DIN is non-est and invalid.

Facts:

M/s. Raam Autobahn India (P.) Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) was served with an assessment order dated November 16, 2022 (“the Impugned Order”) for the period from July, 2017 to September, 2017 by the Assistant Commissioner (“the Respondent”).

The Impugned Order is challenged by the Petitioner on the ground that the Impugned Order did not contain DIN number which is a mandatory as per the Circular.

Issue:

Whether an assessment order issued without a DIN is valid?

Held:

The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in RAAM AUTOBAHN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS - 2025 (2) TMI 931 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURTheld as under:

• Relied on the case of PRADEEP GOYAL VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - 2022 (8) TMI 216 - SUPREME COURT wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court after noticing the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(“the CGST Act”) and the Circular issued by the CBIC, had held that an order, which does not contain a DIN number would be non-est and invalid.
• Further relied on the case of M/S. CLUSTER ENTERPRISES VERSUS THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) -2 ANDHRA PRADESH, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) , PRODDUTUR-II CIRCLE, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, GUNTUR, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. - 2024 (7) TMI 1512 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURTwherein the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court on the basis of the Circular had held that non-mention of a DIN number would mitigate against the validity of such proceedings. Another Division Bench of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of SAI MANIKANTA ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM-II, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) , STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE CHAIRMAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR VISAKHAPATNAM, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OPERATION DIVISION VIZIANAGARAM. - 2024 (6) TMI 1158 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURThad also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.
• Held that, the Impugned Order which was uploaded on the portal requires to be set aside. The Respondent was asked to conduct a fresh assessment after issuing a valid order with a DIN, ensuring due notice to the Petitioner. The period from the date of filing of the Writ Petition to the date of disposal of the Writ Petition shall be excluded for the purpose of calculating the limitation available for passing the assessment order. There shall be no order as to costs.

Our Comments:

The Circular states that DIN shall be done in respect of all communications including e-mails sent to tax payers and other concerned persons by any office of the CBIC across the country.

In a pari materia case of M/S. HABRIK INFRA VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONERST AND OTHERS - 2025 (2) TMI 729 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURTwherein the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh relied on Supreme Court as well as Division Benches of instant Court had held that an order which did not contain a DIN would be non-est and would mitigate against validity of such proceedings. In view of same, impugned assessment order was to be set aside.

 (Author can be reached at [email protected])