WP/23692/2026 of M/s. G. Bhaskar Reddy Bhanumukkala Vs THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(ST) on 19 August 2026

1. M/S. G. BHASKAR REDDY BHANUMUKKALA, WORKS CONTRACTOR

GSTID-37ALXPG5207F1ZX

REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI G. BHASKAR REDDY 5/4, MAIN ROAD, BHANUMUKKALA -518 421 KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONERST, OFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (ST) NANDYAL -II CIRCLE, D.N0.285/3A AND 25/3B, MSR COMPLEX, OPP RTC BUS STAND, NANDYAL - 518501

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI-522503, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (FINANCE) MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110001

...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.23692 of 2026

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Writ Petition No:23692 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: (per Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.Kalyan Chakravarthy, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing respondent Nos.1 and 2.

2. The petitioner was served with an order, in FORM DRC-07, dated 22.01.2025 passed by respondent No.1, under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short “the GST Act”) for the financial year 2023-24. This Order of respondent No.1 has been challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition.

3. This impugned order, in FORM DRC-07, is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that, the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number.

4. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned order.

5. The question of the effect of non-inclusion on 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 & Ors1. 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 (herein referred to as “.C.B.I.C.”), had held that an order, which does not contain a DIN number would be invalid.

6. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa2, on the basis of 1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC) 2 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.)

NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.23692 of 2026

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, Visakhapatnam3, had also held that non- mention of a DIN number would required the order to be set aside.

7. In view of the aforesaid judgments and the circular issued by the C.B.I.C., the non-mention of a DIN number in the order, which was uploaded in the portal, requires the impugned order to be set aside.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned proceedings, dated 22.01.2025 issued by the respondent No.1 with the liberty to the respondent No.1 to conduct fresh assessment, after giving a notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number to the said order. However, the petitioner shall deposit 30% of the disputed tax before the authority concerned within a period of six (06) weeks from today.

9. Needless to observe that amount, if any, already deposited by the petitioner towards the disputed tax after passing of the impugned order, shall be given credit to. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Date:20.08.2026 Ksj

3 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)