2025(04)LCX0171

Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church

Versus

State Of Andhra Pradesh

WRIT PETITION NO: 9266/2025 decided on 09-04-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 9266/2025

Between:

Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church                 ...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others     ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

    1.A V BADRA NAGA SESHAYYA

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 an assessment order, in FORM GST DRC – 07, dated 29.07.2024, passed by the 5th respondent, under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”], for the tax period 2017-2018 to 2023-2024. This assessment order of the 5th respondent has been challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition.

2. This assessment order is challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings did not contain a DIN number. 3. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no DIN number on the impugned assessment order.

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 & Ors . 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. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa , on the basis of 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, Visakhapatnam , had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside.

6. 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.

7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned proceedings, dated 29.07.2024, issued by the 5th respondent, with liberty to the 5th respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number to the said order. 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, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
_______________________
Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J

Date:09.04.2025

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION No:9266 of 2025
(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

09.04.2025