Unsigned GST Assessment Order Set Aside for Lacking Signature and DIN

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

Case Name

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

Writ Petition No. 7029/2025

Date: 19th March 2025

Key Takeaways

• Unsigned and Unnumbered Orders Are Invalid: The court reaffirmed that GST assessment orders must be signed by the assessing officer and must include a DIN. Without these, the order is invalid.
• Legal Precedents Upheld: The decision follows previous judgments and a Supreme Court ruling, reinforcing the importance of procedural compliance in tax administration.
• Fresh Assessment Permitted: The tax department can issue a new order, but it must comply with all procedural requirements.
• Limitation Period Excluded: The time between the original (invalid) order and the court’s decision won’t count against the department for limitation purposes.

Issue

Does the absence of the assessing officer’s signature and the Document Identification Number (DIN) on a GST assessment order render it invalid?

Facts

• Who’s Involved: M/s. Aeron Construction (the petitioner) and the Assistant Commissioner (ST) (the respondent).
• What Happened: The petitioner received a GST assessment order (Form GST DRC-07) dated 02.02.2022 for the financial years 2017-18 and 2018-19.
• Why the Dispute: The order did not have the signature of the assessing officer or a DIN, both of which are required for validity.
• Legal Action: M/s. Aeron Construction filed a writ petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court to challenge the validity of the order.

Arguments

Petitioner (M/s. Aeron Construction)

• The assessment order is invalid because it lacks:
• The signature of the assessing officer.
• The Document Identification Number (DIN).
• Cited previous court decisions and CBIC circulars that require both for validity.

Respondent (Assistant Commissioner, ST)

• The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax admitted that the order indeed lacked both the signature and the DIN.

Key Legal Precedents

The court relied on several important precedents and legal provisions:

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

2. M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner, W.P.No.29397 of 2023 (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 (19.03.2024):

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

4. Pradeep Goyal Vs. Union of India & Ors, 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC):

• The Supreme Court held that an order without a DIN is non-est (invalid) and cannot be enforced.

5. M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa, 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.):

• Non-mention of a DIN number undermines the validity of the order, as per CBIC Circular No.128/47/2019-GST dated 23.12.2019.

6. Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors Vs. The Deputy Commissioner, Special Circle, Visakhapatnam, 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.):

• Similar finding regarding the necessity of DIN for validity.

Judgement

• Decision: The High Court set aside the assessment order dated 02.02.2022 because it lacked both the signature of the assessing officer and the DIN.
• Reasoning: The court followed the above precedents and the CBIC circular, holding that both the signature and DIN are mandatory for a valid GST assessment order.
• Order: The tax department is allowed to conduct a fresh assessment, but must issue a new order with the required signature and DIN. The period between the original order and the court’s decision is excluded from the limitation period for issuing a new order. No costs were awarded.

FAQs

Q1: Why was the GST assessment order set aside?

A: Because it did not have the signature of the assessing officer and did not mention the required Document Identification Number (DIN), both of which are mandatory for validity.

Q2: What is a DIN and why is it important?

A: DIN stands for Document Identification Number. It is a unique number required on all official GST communications to ensure authenticity and traceability. Orders without a DIN are considered invalid.

Q3: Can the tax department issue a new order?

A: Yes, the court allowed the department to issue a fresh assessment order, but it must include both the signature and the DIN.

Q4: What happens to the limitation period for issuing a new order?

A: The time between the original (invalid) order and the court’s decision is excluded from the limitation period, so the department is not penalized for the delay caused by the invalid order.

Q5: What legal provisions and cases did the court rely on?

A: The court cited Sections 160 & 169 of the CGST Act, 2017, and several key cases, including A.V. Bhanoji Row, M/s. SRK Enterprises, M/s. SRS Traders, Pradeep Goyal (Supreme Court), M/s. Cluster Enterprises, and Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors.