Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a GST assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, issued without the signature of the assessing officer, is valid and capable of service, and whether delay in challenging such an unsigned order can defeat the writ petition.
Analysis: The absence of the assessing officer's signature on the impugned assessment order was treated as a fatal defect. The Court followed earlier Division Bench decisions holding that the signature on an assessment order cannot be dispensed with and that the defect is not cured by Sections 160 and 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It also relied on Rule 26(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 to hold that service of an unsigned notice or order is no service in law. On that basis, the delay in approaching the Court was not treated as material, because valid service had not taken place.
Conclusion: The unsigned assessment order was held invalid, and the writ petition succeeded with the order set aside and fresh assessment left open in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The impugned GST assessment was nullified for want of signature, and the assessee obtained relief against the existing demand, though fresh proceedings were permitted.
Ratio Decidendi: An assessment order under the GST regime must bear the assessing officer's signature, and an unsigned order is neither validly served nor cured by the saving provisions relied upon.