2025 (1) TMI 1424 - HC - GST

AP HC Nullifies GST Orders Lacking DIN for 2019-2023; Fresh Assessment Permitted Without Time Penalty

The AP HC set aside the challenged GST assessment order for 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2022-23 due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN), ... Challenge to assessment order - proceeding did not contain a DIN number - HELD THAT:- The question of the effect of non-inclusion of DIN number on proceedings, under the G.S.T. Act, came to be considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PRADEEP GOYAL VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [2022 (8) TMI 216 - SUPREME COURT]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, after noticing the provisions of the Act and the circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (herein referred to as “C.B.I.C.”), had held that an order, which does not contain a DIN number would be non-est and invalid. A Division Bench of this Court in 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 COURT] on the basis of the circular, dated 23.12.2019, bearing No. 128/47/2019-GST, issued by the C.B.I.C., had held that non-mention of a DIN number would mitigate against the validity of such proceedings. Another Division Bench of this 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 COURT] had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside. Conclusion - The non-mention of a DIN number in the order, which was uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned order to be set aside. This Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned proceedings in Form GST DRC-07, dated 26.06.2024, issued by the 1st respondent, with liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number to the said order. The petitioner challenged an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 26.06.2024 for 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2022-23 on several grounds, notably the absence of a DIN number. Respondent conceded the order lacked a DIN. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India & Ors, which held an order without a DIN would be 'non-est and invalid,' and on Division Bench precedents applying CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST (23.12.2019), the court found non-mention of a DIN militates against validity and necessitates setting aside the impugned proceedings. The Form GST DRC-07 dated 26.06.2024 was set aside with liberty to the assessing authority to conduct a fresh assessment after giving notice and assigning a DIN. The period from the impugned assessment until receipt of this order is excluded for limitation purposes. No order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications closed.