ASSESSMENT ORDER WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER

[DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN]

Assessment order

Section 59 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘Act’ for short) provides that every tax payer under this Act shall assess the tax by himself, pay the tax and file the required returns.  Section 62 of the Act gives powers to the proper officer to assess the tax liability who fails to furnish the return.  Section 63 of the Act provides that the proper officer may assess the tax liability of the unregistered person.  Section 64 of the Act provides that the proper officer shall assess the tax liability of such person to protect the interest of revenue and issue an assessment order, if he has sufficient grounds to believe that any delay in doing so may adversely affect the interest of revenue.

Assessment order

The assessment order shall contain the facts of the case, the details of show cause notice issued to the assessee, the reply, if any, received from the assessee along with the documents, consideration of the reply, analysis of the case, assessing the tax and the tax payable along with interest, if any and penalty also.  The assessment order shall contain the signature of the Assessing Officer.

Invalid assessment order

Section 160(1)  of the Act provides that no assessment, re-assessment, adjudication, review, revision, appeal, rectification, notice, summons or other proceedings done, accepted, made, issued, initiated, or purported to have been done, accepted, made, issued, initiated in pursuance of any of the provisions of this Act shall be invalid or deemed to be invalid merely by reason of any mistake, defect or omission therein, if such assessment, re-assessment, adjudication, review, revision, appeal, rectification, notice, summons or other proceedings are in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intents, purposes and requirements of this Act or any existing law.

Section 160(2) of the Act provides that the service of any notice, order or communication shall not be called in question, if the notice, order or communication, as the case may be, has already been acted upon by the person to whom it is issued or where such service has not been called in question at or in the earlier proceedings commenced, continued or finalised pursuant to such notice, order or communication.

Case laws

In AV BHANOJI ROW VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ST VISAKHAPATNAM - 2023 (2) TMI 1224 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT, the High Court held that a reading of Section 160 of the Act makes it very much clear that the safeguards contained therein cannot be made applicable for the contingency in the present case. Section 169 of the Act, which deals with the service of notice, enables the department to make available any decision, order, Summons, Notice or other communication in the common portal. In the guise of the same, the signatures cannot be dispensed with. In the considered opinion of the High court, the aforesaid provisions of law would not come to the rescue of the department, for justifying the impugned action.

The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned order of the 1st Respondent, dated 23.11.2022 and the DRC-07 notice, dated 23.11.2022 for the tax period 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, as well as the show cause notice dated 22.10.2022 and DRC-01 notice, dated 22.10.2022 issued by the 1st Respondent and uploaded in the GST common portal.

In M/S. SRK ENTERPRISES, VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , BHEEMILI CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM - 2023 (12) TMI 156 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT, the writ petitioner contended that the impugned order, dated 28.03.2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, is unsigned and is no order in the eyes of law which cannot be enforced.  The Department contended that the impugned order has not been signed as per the oral order.  The said order was uploaded and the uploading could be done only by the Authority competent to pass the order.  Section 160 of the Act provides that no assessment, re-assessment, initiated in pursuance of any of the provisions of the GST Act, shall be invalid or deemed to be invalid merely by reason of any mistake, defect or omission therein, if such assessment, etc are in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intents, purposes and requirements of the Act or any existing law.

The High Court held that the provisions of Section 160 of the Act will  not be applicable to the present case.  An unsigned order cannot be covered under “any mistake, defect or omission therein” as used in Section 160.  Unsigned order is no order in the eyes of law. Merely uploading of the unsigned order, may be by the Authority competent to pass the order, would not cure the defect which goes to the very root of the matter i.e. validity of the order.

In AMRUTH FILLING STATION VERSUS THE STATE OF AP AND OTHERS - 2025 (2) TMI 784 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT, the petitioner was served with the assessment order, in Form VAT-203, vide DIN3715042443979 dated 15.04.2024, passed by the 2nd respondent, under the AP Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, which was challenged by the petitioner.  The High Court relied on its own judgments as held in the above two cases.  The High Court held that the impugned assessment order would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned assessment order. The High Court set aside the impugned order with directions to the Department to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a signature to the said order. The High Court further held that 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.