WP/7092/2026 of M/s.Rama Gowni Enterprises, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 March 2026

1. M/S.RAMA GOWNI ENTERPRISES,, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT D.NO. L L -110, RT STREET, GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, REP., BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR, ANIL KUMAR GOUD.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, STATE TAX DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 522238

2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SPRING VALLEY APARTMENT, EDUPUGULLA, VIJAYAWADA. 520001

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX, TADIPATRI CIRCLE, ANANTAPUR DIVISION.515411

4. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TADIPATRI CIRCLE, ANANTAPUR DIVISION. 515411

...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 an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring aggrieved by the action of the respondents in issuing FORM GST DRC 01A dated 27.06.2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 to 2023-2024 under Section 24 of APGST, Act 2017 and cumulatively for all the tax periods without a Document Identification Number and without any signature either physical signature or digital signature and consequential show cause notice dated 07.11.2025 in FORM GST DRC 01 and consequential orders in DIN3729122520898 for the Financial Year 2018-19, DIN3729122512162 for the Financial Year 2019-20, DIN3729122515730 for the Financial Year 2020- 21, DIN3729122552540 for the Financial Year 2021-22, D1N3729122557760 for the Financial Year 2022-23, for the Financial Year 2023-24, DIN3729122572984 for the period of July 2017 to April 2024 dated 27.12.2025 tax levy of Rs.68,01,673/- along with applicable interest as arbitrary, illegal, colourable exercise of power, one without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax, Act 2017 apart from being violative-of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner firm under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and and consequently set a side the Notice, dated 27.06.2025 in Form GST DRC- 01A, Notice, dated 07.11.2025 in Form_ GST DRC-01 and consequential Orders in GST DRC-01, dated 27.12.2025 for the Assessment Years 2017- 2018 to 2024-2025 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 proceedings in FORM GST DRC 07 dated 27.12.2025 in orders in DIN3729122520898 for the Financial Year 2018-19, DIN3729122512162 for the Financial Year 2019-20, DIN372912251573 0 for the Financial Year 2020-21, DIN3729122552540 for the Financial Year 2021- 2, D1N3729122557760 for the Financial Year 2022-23, for the Financial Year 2023-24, DfN3729122572984 for the period of July 2017 to April 2024 dated 27.12.2025 issued by the respondent No.4, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

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

The petitioner was served with summary of the assessment orders, in FORM GST DRC – 07, dated 29.12.2025, passed by the 4th respondent, under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”] for the financial years, 2018-2019 to 2023-2024. These orders have been challenged by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition.

2. The said orders, in FORM GST DRC – 07, are challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a signature of the assessing officer.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, on instructions, submits that there is no signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned summary of the assessment orders.

4. The effect of the absence of the signature, on an assessment order was earlier considered by this Court, in the case of A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), in W.P.No.2830 of 2023, decided on 14.02.2023. A Division Bench of this Court, had held that the signature, on the assessment order, cannot be dispensed with and that the provisions of Sections-160 & 169 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, would not rectify such a defect. Following this Judgment, another Division Bench of this Court, in the case of M/s. SRK Enterprises Vs. Assistant

Commissioner, in W.P.No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023, had set aside the impugned assessment order.

5. Another Division Bench of this Court by its Judgment, dated 19.03.2024, in the case of M/s. SRS Traders Vs The. Assistant Commissioner ST & ors, in W.P.No.5238 of 2024, following the aforesaid two Judgments, had held that the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the assessment order, would render the assessment order invalid and set aside the said order.

6. Following the aforesaid Judgments, the impugned assessment orders would have to be set aside, on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned assessment orders.

7. This Court is also cogent of the fact that the impugned order has been passed some time back and the present writ petition has been filed with delay. However, Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 stipulates that service of notice or orders, without signature, would not amount to service at all. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras in T.V.L. Deepa Traders vs. The Deputy Commissioner (W.P.No.19277 of 2024, dated 13.08.2024) had held the same view. Consequently, there is no service of the impugned order even as of today, on account of the absence of signature on the impugned proceeding. In those circumstances, the delay in approaching this Court, would not a relevant factor.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned assessment orders, in FORM GST DRC – 07, dated 29.12.2025, issued by the 4th respondent, with liberty to the 4th respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving a notice and by assigning a signature to the said orders. The period from the date of the impugned assessment orders, till the date of receipt of this order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

_________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

Date:31.03.2026 KPV

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

AND

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION No.7092 of 2026 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

31.03.2026

KPV