2025 (2) TMI 786 - HC - GST

Assessment Order Invalidated for Missing DIN Under GST Act 2017; Fresh Assessment Permitted Without Limitation Period Inclusion.

The HC of Andhra Pradesh invalidated an assessment order under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, due to the absence of a Document Identification Number ... Challenge to assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 - said proceedings 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 Vs. 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, 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 Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa [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 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam [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 Writ Petition challenging the assessment order was disposed of, allowing the respondent to conduct a fresh assessment with the requirement of assigning a DIN number and excluding the period from the original assessment order to the current decision for limitation purposes. Petition disposed off. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh set aside an assessment order issued under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN), citing precedents from the Hon'ble Supreme Court and previous Division Bench rulings. The Court held that an order lacking a DIN number is invalid and non-est, following the Circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. Consequently, the Writ Petition challenging the assessment order was disposed of, allowing the respondent to conduct a fresh assessment with the requirement of assigning a DIN number and excluding the period from the original assessment order to the current decision for limitation purposes. No costs were awarded, and pending applications were closed.