M/S. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering ... vs Assistant Commissioner St, on 22 August, 2025

[Cites 17, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

M/S. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering ... vs Assistant Commissioner St, on 22 August, 2025

Bench: R.Raghunandan Rao

APHC010347372025

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

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST V,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

WRIT PETITION Nos: 17606, 17670. 17709. 17714. 18000. 18175. 18177
and 18854 of 2025

WRIT PETITION No: 17606 of 2025

Between:

Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju, 65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER
AND

1. Assistant Commissioner, Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division

Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, 3"^ Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.

4. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, rep. by its
Commissioner (GST)
...RESPONDENTS
2

(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 24.11.2023 passed by
the 1®' Respondent for the tax period August, 2023 under Section
62 of the GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid
DIN and consequently, set aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the

amounts levied under the assessment order dated 24.11.2023
can be made and that the limitation to file statutory appeal under
Section 107 of the GST Act does not commence until the order
dated 24.11.2023 is communicated with a valid DIN in

accordance with law.

lA No: 1 OF 2025

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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 24.11.2023 issued by the 1®* Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
APHC010347362025

WRIT PETITION No: 17670 OF 2025
3

Between:

M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju, #65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530026, Andhra Pradesh
...PETITIONER
AND

1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Floor
Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.

4. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, rep. by its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS

(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 27.9.2023 passed by the
1®* Respondent for the tax period June, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set- aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied under the assessment order dated 27.9.2023 can be made
and that the limitation to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of
the GST Act does not commence until the order dated 27.9.2023 is
communicated with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
4

lA No: 1 OF 2025

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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 27.9.2023 issued by the 1®* Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI P.KARTHIKRAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
APHC010347442025

■Id:

WRIT PETITION No: 17709 OF 2025

Between:

M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, rep. by its Managing Partner,
Bammidi Nagaraju, 65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent School,
New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER

AND

1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.
5

4. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, rep. by its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS

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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or
direction -

(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 passed by the
1®* Respondent for the tax period April, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied under the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 can be made and

that the limitation to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of the
GST Act does not commence until the order dated 24.7.2023 is

communicated with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
lA No: 1 OF 2025

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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 24.7.2023 issued by the 1®' Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
6

APHC010347452025

WRIT PETITION No: 17714 OF 2025

Between:

AND

1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, 3'^^ Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue (CT-II) Department. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.

4. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, rep. by its
Commissioner (GST)
...RESPONDENTS

(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 20.5.2023 passed by the
St
1 Respondent for the tax period March, 2023 under Section 62 of
the GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set aside the same; or
7

(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied under the assessment order dated 20.5.2023 can be made
and that the limitation to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of
the GST Act does not commence until the order dated 20.5.2023 is
communicated with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
lA No: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed ir> support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 20.5.2023 issued by the 1®' Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
•APHC010351962025

WRIT PETITION No: 18000 OF 2025
Between:

1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
8

2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, 3'^'^ Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.

4. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance. New Delhi rep. by its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS

(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 passed by the
1®* Respondent for the tax period May, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set- aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied under the assessment order dated 24.7.2023 can be made
and that the limitation to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of
the GST Act does not commence until the order dated 24.7.2023 is
communicated with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
lA No: 1 OF 2025

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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 24.7.2023 issued by the 1®' Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as othe.rwise the Petitioner 'wil! be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
9

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
.APHC010352082025

WRIT PETITION No: 18175 OF 2025

Between:

M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works rep. by its Managing
Partner, Bammidi Nagaraju, 65-6-488/6, Himachal Nagar, Behind TNR Talent
School, New Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-530 026, Andhra Pradesh.
...PETITIONER

AND

1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, 3'"* Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.

4. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, rep. by its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit fifed therewith, the High Court may be
pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or
order or direction -
10

(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 27.9.2023 passed by the
1st Respondent for the tax period July, 2023 under Section 62 of the
GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set-aside the same or (b) alternatively, direct that no
enforcement or recovery of the amounts levied under the

assessment order dated 27.9.2023 can be made and that the

limitation to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act
does not commence until the order dated 27.9.2023 is communicated
with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
lA No: 1 OF 2025

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 to
grant interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order
dated 27.9.2023 issued by the 1®' Respondent, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
APHC010352092025

WRIT PETITION No: 18177 OF 2025

Between:

AND

1. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Airport Circle, Visakhapatnam-ll Division,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Floor,
Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.

4. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, rep. by its
Commissioner (GST).
...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the Fligh Court may be
pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or
order or direction -

(a) declaring that the assessment order dated 21.10.2022 passed by the
1®' Respondent for the tax period August, 2022 under Section 62 of
the GST Act is void and illegal for not containing any valid DIN and
consequently, set aside the same; or
(b) alternatively, direct that no enforcement or recovery of the amounts
levied under the assessment order dated 21.10.2022 can be made
and that the limitation to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of
the GST Act does not commence until the order dated 21.10.2022 is
communicated with a valid DIN in accordance with law.
lA No: 1 OF 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.KARTHIK RAMANA

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s. SANTHI CHANDRA, SC FOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
APHC010270792025

WRIT PETITION No: 18854 OF 2025

Between:

M/s. S. Ravindra Reddy Contractor, Rep. by its Proprietor, Mr. S. Ravindra
Reddy, 8-117-12-2R, Edganagar, Banaganapalli-518124, Kurnool District,
Andhra Pradesh.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Nandya!-ll Circle, Kunrool District
Andhra Pradesh.

2. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government
Revenue (CT-II) Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,
Guntur District.

3. The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary (Finance) Ministry of Finance
North Block New Delhi 110001

...RESPONDENTS

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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or
order or direction declaring the action of the 1"' Respondent in issuing
assessment orders dated 30.1.2020 for the period 2018-19 under the Goods
and Service lax Act, 201 ( in Form DRC -07 (both CGST and SGST) without
13

generating the Document Identification Number (DIN) on the summary order
or the show cause notice as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and in gross
violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st
Respondent to redo the assessment following the principles of natural justice
including the procedure under Rule 142(1A) of the Central Goods and
Service Tax Rules, 2017.
lA No: 1 OF 2025

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 to
grant stay of recovery of the disputed demand pursuant to the impugned
assessment orders dated 30.1.2020 (both COST and SGST) passed by the
1®* Respondent for the tax period 2018-19, pending disposal of the Writ
Petition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SRINIVASARAO KUDUPUDI
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA

The Court made the following Common Order:
1
RRR, J & JS, J
W.P.Nos. 17606 of 2025 & batch

APHC010299732025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3541]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION Nos. 17606.17670, 17709. 17714. 18000. 18175
18177 & 18854 of 2025

W.P.No:17606/2025

Between:

Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER

AND

Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

W.P.No:17670/2025

Between:

Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER

AND

Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
2

RRR,J & JS,J
W.P. No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

W.P.No:17709/2025

Between:

M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER

AND

Assistant Commissioner St and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

W.P.No:17714/2Q25

Between:

M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, ...PETITIONER
AND

Assistant Commissioner ST and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:

TKARTHiK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
3

RRR,J & JS,J
W.P. No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

W.P.No:18000/2025

Between;

Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER

AND

Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

W.P.No:18175/2025

Between:

M/s. Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works, ...PETITIONER

AND

Assistant Commissioner St and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
4

RRR,J & JS.J
W.P. No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

W.P.No:18177/2025

Between:

Veera Mohana Krishna Engineering Works ...PETITIONER

AND

Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KARTHIK RAMANA PUTTAMREDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

W.P.No:18854/2025

Between:

S Ravindra Reddy Contractor ...PETITIONER

AND

The Assistant Commissioner and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.SRINIVASA RAO KUDUPUDI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
5
RRR,J & JS,J
W.P.No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

The Court made the following common order:

(per Hoh'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

This batch of Writ Petitions are being disposed of, by way of this

common order, on account of the fact that the issues raised in these Writ

petitions are identical.

2. In all these cases petitioners, who are registered under the

GST regime, have approached this Court challenging assessment orders

passed against them. The main ground for challenge, in all these cases

is the lack of a Document Identification Number on the orders, passed by

the assessing officers.

3. Under the GST Act, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and

Customs, has been given power to issue guidelines and directions to the

tax authorities, for the purposes of better compliance with the provisions

of the Act and the Rules made under the acts.

4. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, in

exercise of this power under Section 168(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, had

issued a Circular bearing No. 122/41/2019-GST, dated 05.11.2019. In this

Circular, the board stated that in keeping with the Government's

objectives of transparency and accountability in indirect tax

administration, a system for electronic generation of a Document

Identification Number has been put in place and that all communications
6
RRR,J & JS,J
W.P.No.17606 of 2025 & Batch

sent by any authority would have to include a Document Identification

Number. It was further stipulated that the presence of a Document

Identification Number is a mandatory requirement and that every

document, communication and proceedings issued under the provisions

of the CGST Act and Rules should contain a Document Identification

Number. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs had then

issued a subsequent Circular dated 23.12.2019 bearing Circular

No. 128/47/2019-GST stating that any specified communication which

does not bear electronic generated document identification number would

be treated as invalid and deemed to have never been issued. This

Circular came to be considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

of Pradeep Goyal vs. Union of India''. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had

specially mentioned this Circular which requires to be followed.

5. Earlier, Writ Petitions, challenging orders of assessment

which did not contain a Document Identification Number and even orders

containing Document Identification Numbers where the show cause

notice or other communications preceding such an assessment order

were filed. This Court, in these cases, including the judgment of this Court

in Cluster Enterprises vs The Deputy Assistant Commissioner^., had

held that the absence of the Document Identification Number would

^ (2022) 63 GSTL 286(SC)
^ 2024 (88) G.S.T.L page 179(A.P)
7

.RRR,J & JS,J
W.P, No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

invalidate the order of assessment. Following these judgments, this Court
has consistently been setting aside any assessment order which does not

contain a Document Identification Number and is remanding the same
back to the assessing authority for passing appropriate orders in

accordance with law. The petitioners, in this batch of Writ Petitions, also

challenge the assessment orders passed without including a Document
Identification Number. The details of the Writ Petitions and the dates on

which the impugned assessment orders have been passed are set out in
the table given below:

Writ Petition Petitioner Date of Explanation for the delay
Number Assessment
order
challenged
1. 17606 of Veera Mohana 24/11/2023 Show cause notice and
2025 Krishna Assessment Order is not
Engineering sePv'ed on the illiterate
Works
petitioner who was depending
on part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond
to the notice and assessment
order
2 17670 of Veera Mohana 27/09/2023 Show cause notice and
2025 Krishna Assessment Order is not
Engineering served on the illiterate
Works
petitioner who was depending
on part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond
to the notice and assessment
order
3. 17709 of Veera Mohana 24/07/2023 No DIN, accordingly limitation
2025 Krishna period for appeal under 107
Engineering does not start(accordingly no
Works
delay),
Show cause notice and
Assessment Order is not
served on the illiterate
petitioner who was depending
8

RRR,J&JS,J
W.P.No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

on
part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond
to the notice and assessment
order.
4. 17714 of Veera Mohana 20/05/2023 Show cause notice anc
2025 Krishna Assessment Order is not
Engineering served on the illiterate
Works
petitioner who was depending
on part time accountant,
accordingly could not responc
to the notice and assessment
order
5. 18000 of Veera Mohana 24/07/2023 No DIN, accordingly limitation
2025 Krishna
period for appeal under 107
Engineering does not start(accordingly no
Works
delay).
Show cause notice and
Assessment Order is not
served on the illiterate
petitioner who was depending
on part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond
to the notice and assessment
order.
6. 18175 of Veera Mohana 27/09/2023 Show cause notice and
2025 Krishna Assessment Order is not
Engineering served on the illiterate
Works
petitioner who was depending
on parttime accountant,
accordingly could not respond
to the notice and assessment
order
7. 18177 of Veera Mohana 21/10/2022 Show cause notice and
2025 Krishna
Assessment Order is not
Engineering served on the illiterate
Works
petitioner who was depending
on
part time accountant,
accordingly could not respond
to the notice and assessment
order.
8. 18854 of Ravindra Reddy 30/01/2020
Petitioner could not respond to
2025
the show cause notice due to
the fact that all the notices
appear to have been uploaded
on the portal and no physical
notices were furnished to the
petitioner. There was no
proper opportunity to contest
the matter.
9

RRR,J & JS,J
W.P.No.17606 of 2025 & Batch

6. As can be seen from the said table above, the orders under

challenge have been passed quite some time back and there is significant

delay in challenging these orders. The affidavits filed in support of these

Writ Petitions have also sought to explain the delay. The reasons given
for the delay, in approaching this Court, are also set out in the table
above.

7.
This Court has heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners in the present batch of cases as well as the learned

Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
Central Taxation Authorities.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that

the instructions issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and

Customs are binding on the authorities and the lack of a Document

Identification Number in an assessment order would render the said

assessment order a nullity and the said order would be a void order. It is

contended that once an order is void, no steps can be taken for collection

of tax on the basis of such orders and for all practicable purposes, there
!S no order of assessment in existence. In such a situation, this Court by

ueuiaring the obvious, that the orders are void, and permitting the

assessing authorities to undertake fresh assessments, would only be
beneficial to the depailrnent apart from being beneficial to the registered
10

RRR,J & JS,J
W.P.No.17606 of 2025 & Batch

persons who have suffered these orders. Learned counsel for the

petitioners would contend that the question of laches or delay would not
arise as the impugned order is itself a dead letter which cannot be revived

and the orders of this Court setting aside such orders would only clarify

and allay any confusion or ambiguity about the status of such orders.

' 9.
The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes as
well as the learned Standing Counsel for the Central Taxation Authorities

would contend that the language in the circulars only stipulates that such
order are invalid. Such orders would not amount to void orders. In that

view of the matter, the orders would remain in force and are enforceable

unless set-aside by this Court. Where such an order is necessary, it

would be essential that the petitioners, seeking such orders, approach
this Court expeditiously. Failure to approach this Court within a

reasonable period of time would amount to laches and this Court would

have the discretion to refuse relief on the ground of laches.

10. The instructions issued by the Central Board of Indirect
Taxes and Customs are instructions issued under Section 168 of the
CGST Act. Section 168 of the CGST Act reads as follows;

Section 168. Power to issue instructions or directions.

(1) The Board may, if it considers it necessary or

expedient so to do for the purpose of uniformity in the
implementation of this Act, issue such orders, instructions
11

RRR,J & JS,J
W.P. No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

or directions to the central tax officers as it may deem fit,
and thereupon all such officers and all other persons
employed in the implementation of this Act shall observe
and follow such orders, instructions or directions.

(2) The Commissioner specified in clause (91) of section
2, sub-section (3) of section 5, clause (b) of sub
section (9) of section 25, sub-sections (3) and (4) of
section 35, sub-section (1) of section 37, sub-section (6) of
section 39, ^[section 44], sub-sections (4) and (5) of
section 52,] ^[sub-section (1) of section 143, except the
second proviso thereof], clause (I) of sub-section (3) of
section 158 and section 167 shall mean a Commissioner
or Joint Secretary posted in the Board and such
Commissioner or Joint Secretary shall exercise the
powers specified in the said sections with the approval of
the Board.

11.
The language in this provision of law makes it abundantly
clear that the power granted under this provision is only the power to
issue instructions to the taxation authorities. Such instructions would be

binding on the taxation authorities. Violation of such instructions may

invalidate the orders passed by the taxation authorities. Such violation

would not result in the orders becoming void. Once the orders are only
invalid, they would remain in force until they are declared to be invalid by

an appropriate Court or authority of appropriate jurisdiction.
12

RRR,J & JS.J
W.P. No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

12. Therefore, the orders under challenge, would continue to be
effective unless set aside by this Court. Once such a declaration is

required from this Court, it would also be necessary for this Court to
consider the question of laches in approaching this Court.

13. In all the Writ Petitions, before this Court, the reasons set out
for the delay in approaching this Court is either the alleged inability of the

petitioners in perusing the orders which have uploaded in the portal or

that there is no limitation for the exercise of appellate jurisdiction, under
Section 107, as service of orders without a Document Identification

Number, would not amount to service and by analogy, there would be no
limitation or reasonable period within which one has to approach this
Court.

14. Both these reasons cannot be accepted by this Court. The
contention that the registered persons/dealers were unaware of the

service of the impugned orders in the portal cannot be accepted as a

ground for condoning delay. Acceptance of such a plea would throw open

the doors for filing of Writ Petitions against the orders which have been

passed years back. In fact most of the Writ petitions in the present batch

are cases where orders had been passed in the year 2023 itself. Further,
the prescribed method of service of notices and orders includes service of

the order through the portal being maintained by the GST Authorities.

f
13

RRR,J & JS,J
W.P.No. 17606 of 2025 & Batch

Once such a method of service has been included in the Act and Rules,
the contention that such
service is not sufficient service and did not give
3ctua[ notice of service to the registered persons cannot be accepted.

15. The contention that
service of an order without a Document
Identification Number would
amount to no service, would be acceptable if
there was such a stipulation
or provision either in the Act or in the Rules.
This stipulation is said to be available in the circulars issued by the CBIC.
However, such circulars. are at best instructions to the taxation authorities

and the petitioners, having received the orders in the portal cannot claim
ignorance of these orders. The inordinate delay, in approaching this court,
has not been satisfactorily explained and these petitions cannot be
entertained at this length of time.

16. For the above
reasons, we decline to interfere with the
impugned orders set out above. Accordingly, all the Writ Petitions are

dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand
closed.
StIA G.HELA NAIDU
//TRUE COPY// assistant registrar
Vp
SECTION OFFICER
To,

1. One CC to Sri P. Karthik Ramana, Advocate [OPUC]
15

2. One CC to Sri Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi, Advocate [OPUC]
3. Two CCs to GP for Commercial Tax. High Court of Andhra Pradesh
[OUT]

4. One CC to O/o. Deputy Solicitor General of India, High Court of Andhra
Pradesh. [OPUC]
5. One CC to M/s. Santhi Chandra, SC for Central Board of Indirect Taxes
& Customs. [OPUC]
6. Two CD Copies.
gi

Hpv - I
16

HIGH COURT

DATED:22/08/2025

COMMON ORDER

WP.No's: 17606, 17670, 17709, 17714, 18000,18175, 18177 and 18854 of 2025 5 15 SEP 2025 s. g ^ ^ Currwil Sactlon DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati