<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (1) TMI 1645 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464599</link>
    <description>An assessment order under GST must bear the assessing officer&#039;s signature; an unsigned order is invalid and suffers from a jurisdictional defect. The Court followed earlier Division Bench rulings and held that the omission is not cured by the saving or service provisions in Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act, 2017. The unsigned assessment order was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2025 20:22:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=862514" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 1645 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464599</link>
      <description>An assessment order under GST must bear the assessing officer&#039;s signature; an unsigned order is invalid and suffers from a jurisdictional defect. The Court followed earlier Division Bench rulings and held that the omission is not cured by the saving or service provisions in Sections 160 and 169 of the CGST Act, 2017. The unsigned assessment order was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464599</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>