2025 (5) TMI 2070 - HC - GST

Challenge to assessment order - proceedings did not contain a DIN number - HELD THAT - 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 2022 (8) TMI 216 - SUPREME COURT . 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 (C.B.I.C.) had held that an order which does not contain a DIN number would be non-est and invalid. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Cluster Enterprises Vs. The Deputyssistant Commissioner (ST)-2 Kadapa 2024 (7) TMI 1512 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT 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 2024 (6) TMI 1158 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT had also held that non-mention of a DIN number would require the order to be set aside. 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. This Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 07.10.2024 issued by the 1st respondent with liberty to the 1st respondent to conduct fresh assessment after giving notice to the petitioner and assigning a DIN number to the said order.

Summary

The Andhra Pradesh High Court, per Justice R. Raghunandan Rao, set aside the GST assessment order dated 07.10.2024 issued to the petitioner due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN), a procedural defect rendering the order "non-est and invalid" as established by the Supreme Court in *Pradeep Goyal Vs. Union of India & Ors*, 2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC). The Court relied on the CBIC Circular No.128/47/2019-GST and prior Division Bench rulings (*M/s. Cluster Enterprises* 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (A.P.) and *Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors* 2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (A.P.)) holding that non-mention of a DIN number vitiates the validity of GST proceedings. The Court granted liberty to the respondent to conduct a fresh assessment with proper issuance of a DIN and excluded the period from the impugned order's date to the receipt of this judgment for limitation purposes. No costs were awarded, and pending applications were closed.