The Andhra Pradesh High Court has set aside a GST assessment order and its consequential demand summary on the ground that the impugned proceedings did not bear the signature of the assessing officer.
The bench of Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice T.C.D. Sekhar has observed that an unsigned assessment order is legally invalid and cannot be treated as having been served upon the taxpayer.
BUY NOW: E-Magzine: Single SCN or Composite Assessment Order for Multiple Tax Periods
The petitioner/assessee challenged a Summary of Order issued in Form GST DRC-07 dated September 3, 2024, relating to the tax period July 2017 to March 2018. The taxpayer contended that the assessment proceedings suffered from multiple legal infirmities, including non-service of the show cause notice, lack of opportunity of hearing, limitation issues, and the absence of a validly signed assessment order.
The petitioner further alleged that the Order-in-Original had been communicated only through WhatsApp on February 11, 2025, without adherence to the statutory modes of service prescribed under the GST law. The challenge also questioned the invocation of Section 74 proceedings and the validity of the DRC-07 summary issued without the signature of the concerned officer.
During the hearing, the Government Pleader, acting on instructions informed the Court that the impugned assessment order indeed did not contain the signature of the assessing officer. This admission became the central issue in the writ proceedings.
The High Court observed that the validity of an unsigned assessment order was no longer res integra and had already been considered in several earlier judgments of the Court.
The Bench referred to its earlier decision in A.V. Bhanoji Row v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), where it was held that an assessment order must necessarily bear the signature of the competent officer and that the defect cannot be cured by invoking Sections 160 or 169 of the CGST Act.
The Court also relied upon subsequent rulings in M/s SRK Enterprises v. Assistant Commissioner and M/s SRS Traders v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), where unsigned assessment orders were similarly declared invalid and set aside.
Following these precedents, the Bench concluded that the absence of the assessing officer’s signature rendered the impugned assessment proceedings legally unsustainable.
An important aspect of the judgment concerns limitation and service of orders.
The Revenue argued that the assessment order had been passed long before the filing of the writ petition. However, the Court rejected the relevance of delay in the peculiar facts of the case.
The Bench noted that Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 requires electronic records and communications to bear proper authentication. An unsigned order cannot be regarded as a validly served order. The Court also referred to the Madras High Court’s decision in T.V.L. Deepa Traders v. Deputy Commissioner, which took a similar view regarding unsigned GST proceedings.
Accordingly, the Court held that since the assessment order lacked the officer’s signature, there was effectively no valid service of the order even as on the date of hearing. Consequently, the delay in approaching the High Court could not be held against the taxpayer.
Allowing the writ petition, the Andhra Pradesh High Court set aside the Summary of Order in Form GST DRC-07 dated September 3, 2024. However, the Court granted liberty to the tax authorities to undertake a fresh assessment in accordance with law after issuing proper notice and passing a duly authenticated order bearing the officer’s signature.
The Court further directed that, for the purpose of limitation, the period from the date of the impugned assessment order until receipt of the High Court’s judgment would stand excluded. This ensures that the Revenue retains the opportunity to initiate fresh proceedings without being prejudiced by the time spent in litigation.
Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy
To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.
