Full News

Unsigned GST Assessment Order Set Aside by Andhra Pradesh High Court

This case involves M/s Usman Enterprises challenging a GST assessment order issued without the signature of the assessing officer. The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the unsigned order and emphasizing that such orders are invalid under the law. The court also allowed the tax authorities to issue a fresh, properly signed order after giving the petitioner a fair hearing.

Get the full picture - access the original judgement of the court order here

Case Name

M/s Usman Enterprises vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) & Others (High Court of Andhra Pradesh)

W.P. No. 25707 of 2024

Date: 11th December 2024

Key Takeaways

Unsigned assessment orders are invalid: The court reaffirmed that a GST assessment order must be signed by the assessing officer. An unsigned order is not legally valid.
Natural justice must be followed: The petitioner must be given an opportunity to be heard before an order is passed.
Tax authorities can re-issue orders: The authorities are allowed to issue a fresh order, but it must be properly signed and follow due process.
Limitation period paused: The time taken for this writ petition will not count towards the limitation period for passing a new assessment order.

Issue

Is a GST assessment order valid if it is not signed by the assessing officer, and can such an order be set aside for violating principles of natural justice?

Facts

Who’s involved?
Petitioner: M/s Usman Enterprises, represented by its proprietor, Mr. Shaik Nayeem.
Respondents: Assistant Commissioner (ST), GST authorities, State of Andhra Pradesh, Union of India, and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.
What happened?
The petitioner received an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.05.2024, demanding tax, interest, and penalty totaling about Rs. 9.59 crores for the period 2019-20 to July 2023.
The order was unsigned and allegedly issued without giving the petitioner a personal hearing.
Why the dispute?
The petitioner argued that the unsigned order was arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violated the principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioner sought to have the order declared null and void.

Arguments

Petitioner (M/s Usman Enterprises)

The assessment order was not signed by the assessing officer, making it invalid.
No opportunity for a personal hearing was given, violating natural justice.
The order was arbitrary and contrary to law, specifically Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
Requested the court to set aside the order and suspend its operation pending the writ petition.

Respondents (GST Authorities)

The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax admitted that the assessment order did not bear the signature of the assessing officer.
No substantial defense was raised regarding the absence of the signature.

Key Legal Precedents

The court relied on several previous decisions:

1. A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), W.P. No. 2830 of 2023, decided 14.02.2023

Held that the signature on an assessment order is mandatory and cannot be dispensed with.
Sections 160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, do not cure the defect of a missing signature.

2. M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, W.P. No. 29397 of 2023, decided 10.11.2023

Followed the above judgment and set aside an unsigned assessment order.

3. M/s. SRS Traders Vs. The Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors, W.P. No. 5238 of 2024, decided 19.03.2024

Reiterated that the absence of the assessing officer’s signature renders the order invalid.

Judgement

The High Court set aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.05.2024 due to the absence of the assessing officer’s signature.
The court granted liberty to the tax authorities to conduct a fresh assessment, provided they give notice to the petitioner and ensure the new order is properly signed.
The period during which the writ petition was pending will be excluded from the limitation period for passing a new assessment order.
No order as to costs (each party bears its own costs).

FAQs

Q1: Why was the GST assessment order set aside?

A: Because it was not signed by the assessing officer, which is a mandatory legal requirement.

Q2: Can the tax authorities issue a new order?

A: Yes, the court allowed them to issue a fresh, properly signed order after giving the petitioner a fair hearing.

Q3: What happens to the limitation period for issuing a new order?

A: The time spent on this writ petition will not count towards the limitation period for passing a new assessment order.

Q4: What legal principles did the court emphasize?

A: The importance of following due process, including the requirement for a signed order and the right to a fair hearing (natural justice).

Q5: What are the key case laws cited?

A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), W.P. No. 2830 of 2023
M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, W.P. No. 29397 of 2023
M/s. SRS Traders Vs. The Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors, W.P. No. 5238 of 2024

Similar Ripples

Questions

There is no question

Unsigned GST Assessment Order Set Aside by Andhra Pradesh High Court

Write your Comment

Generic

Reportdata/CGST-AP-25707-2024.pdf

Would you like to edit this news ? Edit

Select Format

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

Advanced

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

Add tags

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

PUBLISH IT

Don't sell
PUBLISH IT
Publish privately
SAVE AS DRAFT

Dont't publish now

<a href="https://thakurani.sgp1.digitaloceanspaces.com/media/data/CGST-AP-25707-2024.pdf" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 204);">Get the full picture - access the original judgement of the court order here</a><h3>Case Name</h3>M/s Usman Enterprises vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) &amp; Others (High Court of Andhra Pradesh)W.P. No. 25707 of 2024Date: 11th December 2024<h3>Key Takeaways</h3><ul><li>Unsigned assessment orders are invalid:&nbsp;The court reaffirmed that a GST assessment order must be signed by the assessing officer. An unsigned order is not legally valid.</li><li>Natural justice must be followed:&nbsp;The petitioner must be given an opportunity to be heard before an order is passed.</li><li>Tax authorities can re-issue orders:&nbsp;The authorities are allowed to issue a fresh order, but it must be properly signed and follow due process.</li><li>Limitation period paused:&nbsp;The time taken for this writ petition will not count towards the limitation period for passing a new assessment order.</li></ul><h3>Issue</h3>Is a GST assessment order valid if it is not signed by the assessing officer, and can such an order be set aside for violating principles of natural justice?<h3>Facts</h3><ul><li>Who’s involved?</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Petitioner: M/s Usman Enterprises, represented by its proprietor, Mr. Shaik Nayeem.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Respondents: Assistant Commissioner (ST), GST authorities, State of Andhra Pradesh, Union of India, and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.</li><li>What happened?</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The petitioner received an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.05.2024, demanding tax, interest, and penalty totaling about Rs. 9.59 crores for the period 2019-20 to July 2023.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The order was unsigned and allegedly issued without giving the petitioner a personal hearing.</li><li>Why the dispute?</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The petitioner argued that the unsigned order was arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violated the principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The petitioner sought to have the order declared null and void.</li></ul><h3>Arguments</h3>Petitioner (M/s Usman Enterprises)<ul><li>The assessment order was not signed by the assessing officer, making it invalid.</li><li>No opportunity for a personal hearing was given, violating natural justice.</li><li>The order was arbitrary and contrary to law, specifically Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.</li><li>Requested the court to set aside the order and suspend its operation pending the writ petition.</li></ul> Respondents (GST Authorities)<ul><li>The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax admitted that the assessment order did not bear the signature of the assessing officer.</li><li>No substantial defense was raised regarding the absence of the signature.</li></ul><h3>Key Legal Precedents</h3>The court relied on several previous decisions:1. A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), W.P. No. 2830 of 2023, decided 14.02.2023<ul><li class="ql-indent-1">Held that the signature on an assessment order is mandatory and cannot be dispensed with.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sections 160 &amp; 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, do not cure the defect of a missing signature.</li></ul> 2. M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, W.P. No. 29397 of 2023, decided 10.11.2023<ul><li class="ql-indent-1">Followed the above judgment and set aside an unsigned assessment order.</li></ul> 3. M/s. SRS Traders Vs. The Assistant Commissioner ST &amp; Ors, W.P. No. 5238 of 2024, decided 19.03.2024<ul><li class="ql-indent-1">Reiterated that the absence of the assessing officer’s signature renders the order invalid.</li></ul><h3>Judgement</h3><ul><li>The High Court set aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.05.2024 due to the absence of the assessing officer’s signature.</li><li>The court granted liberty to the tax authorities to conduct a fresh assessment, provided they give notice to the petitioner and ensure the new order is properly signed.</li><li>The period during which the writ petition was pending will be excluded from the limitation period for passing a new assessment order.</li><li>No order as to costs (each party bears its own costs).</li></ul><h3>FAQs</h3>Q1: Why was the GST assessment order set aside?A: Because it was not signed by the assessing officer, which is a mandatory legal requirement. Q2: Can the tax authorities issue a new order?A: Yes, the court allowed them to issue a fresh, properly signed order after giving the petitioner a fair hearing. Q3: What happens to the limitation period for issuing a new order?A: The time spent on this writ petition will not count towards the limitation period for passing a new assessment order. Q4: What legal principles did the court emphasize?A: The importance of following due process, including the requirement for a signed order and the right to a fair hearing (natural justice). Q5: What are the key case laws cited?<ul><li>A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), W.P. No. 2830 of 2023</li><li>M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, W.P. No. 29397 of 2023</li><li>M/s. SRS Traders Vs. The Assistant Commissioner ST &amp; Ors, W.P. No. 5238 of 2024</li></ul>

<a href="https://thakurani.sgp1.digitaloceanspaces.com/media/data/CGST-AP-25707-2024.pdf" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 204);">Get the full picture - access the original judgement of the court order here</a><h3>Case Name</h3>M/s Usman Enterprises vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) & Others (High Court of Andhra Pradesh)W.P. No. 25707 of 2024Date: 11th December 2024<h3>Key Takeaways</h3><ul><li>Unsigned assessment orders are invalid: The court reaffirmed that a GST assessment order must be signed by the assessing officer. An unsigned order is not legally valid.</li><li>Natural justice must be followed: The petitioner must be given an opportunity to be heard before an order is passed.</li><li>Tax authorities can re-issue orders: The authorities are allowed to issue a fresh order, but it must be properly signed and follow due process.</li><li>Limitation period paused: The time taken for this writ petition will not count towards the limitation period for passing a new assessment order.</li></ul><h3>Issue</h3>Is a GST assessment order valid if it is not signed by the assessing officer, and can such an order be set aside for violating principles of natural justice?<h3>Facts</h3><ul><li>Who’s involved?</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Petitioner: M/s Usman Enterprises, represented by its proprietor, Mr. Shaik Nayeem.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Respondents: Assistant Commissioner (ST), GST authorities, State of Andhra Pradesh, Union of India, and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.</li><li>What happened?</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The petitioner received an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.05.2024, demanding tax, interest, and penalty totaling about Rs. 9.59 crores for the period 2019-20 to July 2023.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The order was unsigned and allegedly issued without giving the petitioner a personal hearing.</li><li>Why the dispute?</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The petitioner argued that the unsigned order was arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violated the principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The petitioner sought to have the order declared null and void.</li></ul><h3>Arguments</h3>Petitioner (M/s Usman Enterprises)<ul><li>The assessment order was not signed by the assessing officer, making it invalid.</li><li>No opportunity for a personal hearing was given, violating natural justice.</li><li>The order was arbitrary and contrary to law, specifically Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.</li><li>Requested the court to set aside the order and suspend its operation pending the writ petition.</li></ul> Respondents (GST Authorities)<ul><li>The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax admitted that the assessment order did not bear the signature of the assessing officer.</li><li>No substantial defense was raised regarding the absence of the signature.</li></ul><h3>Key Legal Precedents</h3>The court relied on several previous decisions:1. A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), W.P. No. 2830 of 2023, decided 14.02.2023<ul><li class="ql-indent-1">Held that the signature on an assessment order is mandatory and cannot be dispensed with.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sections 160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, do not cure the defect of a missing signature.</li></ul> 2. M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, W.P. No. 29397 of 2023, decided 10.11.2023<ul><li class="ql-indent-1">Followed the above judgment and set aside an unsigned assessment order.</li></ul> 3. M/s. SRS Traders Vs. The Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors, W.P. No. 5238 of 2024, decided 19.03.2024<ul><li class="ql-indent-1">Reiterated that the absence of the assessing officer’s signature renders the order invalid.</li></ul><h3>Judgement</h3><ul><li>The High Court set aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 18.05.2024 due to the absence of the assessing officer’s signature.</li><li>The court granted liberty to the tax authorities to conduct a fresh assessment, provided they give notice to the petitioner and ensure the new order is properly signed.</li><li>The period during which the writ petition was pending will be excluded from the limitation period for passing a new assessment order.</li><li>No order as to costs (each party bears its own costs).</li></ul><h3>FAQs</h3>Q1: Why was the GST assessment order set aside?A: Because it was not signed by the assessing officer, which is a mandatory legal requirement. Q2: Can the tax authorities issue a new order?A: Yes, the court allowed them to issue a fresh, properly signed order after giving the petitioner a fair hearing. Q3: What happens to the limitation period for issuing a new order?A: The time spent on this writ petition will not count towards the limitation period for passing a new assessment order. Q4: What legal principles did the court emphasize?A: The importance of following due process, including the requirement for a signed order and the right to a fair hearing (natural justice). Q5: What are the key case laws cited?<ul><li>A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), W.P. No. 2830 of 2023</li><li>M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, W.P. No. 29397 of 2023</li><li>M/s. SRS Traders Vs. The Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors, W.P. No. 5238 of 2024</li></ul>

Hi Thakurani,
I want to withdraw in my Thakurani wallet
Thanks,

Select the reason for validity check

I feel great..the news is still good.please give the reason too..thanks..

Why do you think the News as invalid?” Please mention the reason.

I appreciate your effort. May I request you to select one of the reasons from below.
I am marking this post and your reason to Thakurani Moderators. They will take appropriate action.
Thanks,

Write your reason

My Dear ,

Harassing

Spam

Ingenuine

Rotten

Alien

Plagiarism

Unformatted

Full News

Unsigned GST Assessment Order Set Aside by Andhra Pradesh High Court