WP/12961/2026 of M/s.Dara Krishna Prasad Mines and Minerals Vs The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST) - II on 5 May 2026

1. M/S.DARA KRISHNA PRASAD MINES AND MINERALS, H.NO.4-174, KOVURUPALLI, BOGOLE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT - 533306, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR.DARA KRISHNA PRASAD

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST II, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST), KAVALI CIRICLE, KAVALI - 524 201 SPSR NELLORE DIST,A.P.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST, KAVALI CIRICLE, KAVALI - 524 201, SPSR NELLORE DIST,A.P.

3. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER ST AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, TIRUPATHI - 517 501, CHITTOOR DIST, A.P.

4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, (COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT), A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI - 522 237, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

5. HDFC BANK, TADEPALLI BRANCH, H.NO. 12/456/1, GROUND FLOOR, WARD NO. 12, TADEPALLI BYPASS, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 501.

...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 tomay be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction declaring (i) the action of the 1st Respondent in issuing the Order, dated 25.11.2023 for the tax period 2021-22 under SGST / COST Acts, 2017, without signature of the officer concerned either physically or digitally is not valid in the eye of law and without DIN in the Notice and Orders passing Orders are arbitrary, contrary to law and in violation of principles of natural justice and rule of law, (ii) The appeal Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent dated 23.12.2025 for the tax period 2021-22 under the SGST / CGST Acts,2017 without considering the grounds of appeal of the Petitioner and dismissing the appeal without following the due process of law is not justified and valid and consequently set aside the Proceedings of the 1st Respondent dated 25.11.2023 and Appeal Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent dated 23.12.2025 as null and void and pass such 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 may be pleased to suspend the Operation of the Orders of the 1st Respondent dated 25.11.2023 and Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent dated 23.12.2025, for the tax period 2021-22, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. 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 may be pleased to Suspend the Operation of Garnishee Notice dated 03.04.2026 issued by the 1st Respondent in Form GST DRC -13, which was served on 15.04.2026 demanding the tax dues for the tax period 2017-18 to 2021-22, pending disposal of the above writ petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

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

The petitioner herein, which is registered under the GST Act, was subjected to an order of assessment, dated 25.11.2023. An appeal filed against the said order came to be rejected, by an order dated 23.12.2025, on the ground that, the appeal has been filed beyond the period of limitation provided for filing of such appeal.

2. 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.

3. 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 invalid.

4. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, would contend that the petitioner having availed the remedy of appeal and having failed in the said appeal, cannot be permitted to challenge the order of assessment.

1 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC)

5. 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.

6. Following the said Judgment, this Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order, dated 25.11.2023, and remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer, for passing fresh order in accordance with law. This order is subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 10% of the disputed tax, within a period of six (06) weeks. Any payment made or any amount recovered from the petitioner, after the passing of the impugned order, shall be adjusted against the aforesaid 10%. Any garnishee notice, issued against the petitioner, shall also stand set aside. 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

________________ T.C.D.SEKHAR, J Date:06.05.2026 MJA

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

AND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION No:12961 of 2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

06.05.2026

MJA