Service of GST Notice or Orders without Signature Amounts to No Service at All: Karnataka HC says assessee’s delay in Approaching Court Irrelevant [Read Order]
The court noted that since an unsigned order cannot be deemed served, the petitioner’s delay in approaching the Court was irrelevant.
GST Notice - Orders - Signature - No Service - Taxscan
GST Notice - Orders - Signature - No Service - Taxscan
The Andhra Pradesh High Court set aside an order issued under the GST (Goods and Services Tax ) Act on the ground that it was not signed by the assessing officer and also ruled that thus, the delay of the petitioner/assessee in approaching the court is irrelevant.
The petitioner, Tirumala Electronics (closed), had challenged the GST assessment order in Form DRC-07 dated 16.09.2023 and the summary order dated 20.10.2023, arguing that the proceedings lacked both a Document Identification Number (DIN) and the officer’s signature.
A Division Bench comprising Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice T.C.D. Sekhar held that such unsigned proceedings were invalid and amounted to no service in law.
The bench relied on earlier rulings including A.V. Bhanoji Row v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), M/s SRK Enterprises v. Assistant Commissioner, and M/s SRS Traders v. Assistant Commissioner, which consistently held that the absence of an officer’s signature vitiates GST orders.
In the case of A.V. Bhanoji Row Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) , the court observed 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.”
The Bench also referred to Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, which expressly provides that notices or orders without signatures do not constitute valid service. It was noted that since an unsigned order cannot be deemed served, the petitioner’s delay in approaching the Court was irrelevant.
Accordingly, the Court quashed the impugned penalty and assessment orders for FYs 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21, while granting liberty to the GST department to issue fresh proceedings after due notice and with proper signature.
It further directed that the period from the date of the original orders till receipt of the Court’s order be excluded for limitation purposes.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
