WP/16222/2026 of M/S ATYAM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED Vs THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST on 23 June 2026

1. M/S ATYAM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, (A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956), HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 5-244 TO 248, CHAGALLU MANDAL, BRAHMANAGUDEM-534306, WEST GODAVARI, ANDHRA PRADESH. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI. ATHYAM VEERA VENKATA SATISH S/O SRI. NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, GSTIN 37AAICA3350N1ZF

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, NIDADAVOLU CIRCLE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM DIVISION, D.NO. 3-10-8/1, 2ND FLOOR OF RAYUDU NURSING HOME, RAMNAGAR, PATIMEEDA, NIDADAVOLE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 534 301

2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, (ST) (FAC) AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, 40-5-19/9B, BACK OF NVKR TOWERS, OPP P.B. SIDDHARTHA COLLEGE MOGULRAJAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA-520 010, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, 12-468/4, VIJAYA ELITE, ADJ. TO NH-16 SERVICE ROAD, KUNCHANAPALLI-522 501,

GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

REVENUE (CT-II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI-522237,

GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toPleased to (a) Issue a Writ of MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction calling for the records relating to the impugned endorsement in A.O. DIN3708042656346 dated 08.04.2026 (Ex.P-

1) passed by the 2 Respondent and the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD3708240280686 dated 31.08.2024 (Ex.P2) passed by the 1ST Respondent, and after perusing the same, be pleased to quash them as illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to suspend the operation of impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD3708240280686 dated 31.08.2024 (Ex.P2) passed by the 1ST Respondent IA NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings of recovery of Rs.8,20,538/- pursuant to impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD3708240280686 dated 31.08.2024 (Ex.P2) passed by the 1ST Respondent, pending hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition. If the interim relief is not granted as prayed for, the petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. C SANJEEVA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

2. The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

Heard Sri C. Sanjeeva Rao, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner herein, which is registered under the GST Act, was subjected to order of assessment, dated 31.08.2024. An appeal filed against the said order came to be rejected, on the ground that, the appeal has been filed beyond the period of limitation provided for filing of such appeal.

3. Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the petitioner has approached this Court, on the ground that, the order of assessment does not contain a DIN number.

4. The question of the effect of non-inclusion of 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 non-est and invalid.

5. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, appearing for the respondents, would contend that the petitioner having availed the remedy 1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC)

of appeal and having failed in the said appeal, cannot be permitted to challenge the order of assessment.

6. A Division Bench of this Court, in its order, dated 18.12.2023, in W.P.No.31675 of 2023, had held, in similar circumstances that a challenge to the original order would be maintainable even if the appeal has been disposed of.

7. Following the said Judgment, this Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order, dated 31.08.2024, and remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer, for passing fresh orders in accordance with law.

8. Needless to say, the period from the date of the impugned assessment order, till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation.

There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

_______________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J

Date:24.06.2026 KPV

Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Recorded Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

AND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

WRIT PETITION No.16222 of 2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

24.06.2026

KPV