GST assessment order quashed as absence of Document Identification Number (DIN) rendered it invalid under CBIC circular and Supreme Court precedent

Case: M/s. Sri Venkateswara Agencies v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) & Others
Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati
Petition No.: W.P. No. 2530 of 2025
Date of Judgment: 05 February 2025
Category: Validity of Assessment Order – Absence of Document Identification Number (DIN)
Relevant Provisions: Sections 73 & 74 of CGST Act, 2017; CBIC Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST dated 23 December 2019

Facts (Para 1–3)

The petitioner, M/s Sri Venkateswara Agencies, challenged an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29 December 2023 issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) for the tax periods 2017-18 to 2019-20.
The key contention was that the order lacked a Document Identification Number (DIN), mandatory for all communications issued by GST authorities in accordance with CBIC’s Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST. The State counsel conceded that the order indeed did not bear any DIN.

Questions for Determination (Para 4)

Whether an assessment order issued without a DIN is valid and enforceable under the GST law, given the CBIC circular and judicial precedents.

Observations (Para 4–6)

The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Pradeep Goyal v. Union of India [2022 (63) G.S.T.L. 286 (SC)], which held that orders without DIN are non-est in law and therefore unenforceable.
It also cited two Division Bench rulings of the same High Court –

• M/s Cluster Enterprises v. Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Kadapa [2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 179 (AP)], and

• Sai Manikanta Electrical Contractors v. Deputy Commissioner (ST), Visakhapatnam [2024 (88) G.S.T.L. 303 (AP)] – both holding that non-mention of DIN invalidates proceedings under the GST Act.

Applying these authorities and the CBIC circular, the Bench held that the impugned order was void ab initio for want of DIN.

Judgment (Para 6–7)

The Court set aside the impugned assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29 December 2023 for lack of DIN.
However, it granted liberty to the assessing authority to re-issue a fresh order after issuing a valid notice and assigning a DIN.
For limitation purposes, the period between 29 December 2023 and the receipt of this judgment shall stand excluded.
No order as to costs.

Summary of Cases Referred

Between Fine Lines

This ruling reiterates that a missing DIN is not a minor irregularity but a fatal defect. Every order, notice, or communication under GST must bear a valid DIN to ensure authenticity and accountability. Businesses should carefully verify the DIN on any order before responding or complying; an order without DIN is legally void and unenforceable.

Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”