An assessment order without the signature of the Assessing Officer is invalid

An assessment order without the signature of the Assessing Officer is invalid. The court ruled that the unsigned orders are legally void and set them aside, granting the department the liberty to conduct fresh assessments with proper signed notices.

Issue

Whether GST assessment orders that lack the signature of the Assessing Officer are valid, and if their service can be considered proper under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act).

Facts

The assessee challenged several assessment orders issued by the respondent authority under the GST Act for the periods 2019-20 to 2022-23. The primary ground for the challenge was that these orders did not contain the signature of the Assessing Officer.

Decision

The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the impugned assessment orders must be set aside due to the absence of the Assessing Officer’s signature. The court cited Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, which stipulates that the service of a notice or order without a signature is not valid service. Since the orders were unsigned, they were deemed to have never been served on the assessee, making the delay in approaching the High Court irrelevant.

The court disposed of the writ petition by setting aside the impugned assessment orders and granting the respondent authority the liberty to conduct fresh assessments. However, the authority was directed to issue a proper notice with a signature. To ensure the department wasn’t prejudiced by its own error, the court ordered that the period from the date of the impugned assessment orders until the date of receipt of the High Court’s order be excluded for the purposes of limitation.

Key Takeaways

Signature is Mandatory: The signature of the Assessing Officer is not just a formality; it is a fundamental requirement for the validity of an assessment order. The absence of a signature renders the order invalid and legally void.
Rule 26(3) of CGST Rules, 2017: This rule explicitly states that notices, certificates, and orders issued electronically must be authenticated with a digital signature certificate. The court’s interpretation confirms that if this rule is not followed, the document is not properly served and has no legal standing.
Service of Order: An unsigned order is considered an invalid order, which means it cannot be deemed to have been served on the assessee at all. This protects the assessee’s right to challenge the order and makes the delay in filing a petition irrelevant.
No Rectification for Fundamental Flaws: The court implicitly held that a fundamental flaw like the absence of a signature cannot be rectified under a curative provision like Section 160 of the CGST Act. The provision is for minor mistakes, not for the complete omission of a mandatory authentication.
Procedural Fairness: The court’s decision reinforces the importance of procedural fairness and legal compliance on the part of tax authorities. It ensures that a taxpayer is not subject to a demand based on a procedurally flawed and legally void order.

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

RCC Engineering (P.) Ltd.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner^*

R. Raghunandan Rao and T.C.D. Sekhar, JJ.

WRIT PETITION NO. 21892 of 2025

SEPTEMBER 3, 2025

Karthik Ramana Puttamreddy for the Petitioner.

ORDER

R. Raghunandan Rao, J.-The petitioner was served with an assessment orders, dated 19.08.2024 and 24.08.2024, passed by the 1^st respondent, under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the GST Act’) for the financial years 2019-20, 2021-22 and 2022-23. These orders have been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition.

2. These assessment orders, in Form GST DRC-07, are challenged by the petitioner, on various grounds, including the ground that the said proceedings do not contain the signature of the assessing officer.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, on instructions, submits that there is no signature of the assessing officer, on the impugned assessment orders.

4. The effect of the absence of the signature, on an assessment order was earlier considered by this Court, in the case of A V Bhanoji Row v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) W.P.No.2830 of 2023, decided on 14.02.2023. A Division Bench of this Court, had held 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. Following this Judgment, another Division Bench of this Court, in the case of SRK Enterprises v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) [2024] 102 GST 450/82 GSTL 142 (Andhra Pradesh)/W.P.No.29397 of 2023, decided on 10.11.2023, had set aside the impugned assessment order.

5. Another Division Bench of this Court by its Judgment, dated 19.03.2024, in the case of SRS Traders v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) W.P.No.5238 of 2024, following the aforesaid two Judgments, had held that the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on the assessment order, would render the assessment order invalid and set aside the said order.

6. Following the aforesaid Judgments, the impugned assessment orders would have to be set aside on account of the absence of the signature of the assessing officer, on these impugned assessment orders.

7. This Court is also cogent of the fact that the impugned order has been passed some time back and the present writ petition has been filed with delay. However, Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 stipulates that service of notice or orders, without signature, would not amount to service at all. The Hon’ble High Court of Madras in (Tvl. Deepa Traders v. Deputy Commissioner (ST), Chennai 106 GST 584/90 GSTL 411 (Madras)/W.P.No.19277 of 2024, dated 13.08.2024) had held the same view. Consequently, there is no service of the impugned order even as of today, on account of the absence of signature on the impugned proceeding. In those circumstances, the delay in approaching this Court, would not a relevant factor.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned assessment orders, in Form GST GST-07, dated 19.08.2024 & 24.08.2024 issued by the 1^st respondent, with liberty to the 1^st respondent to conduct fresh assessment, after giving notice and by assigning a signature to the said orders. The period from the date of the impugned assessment orders, till the date of receipt of this Order shall be excluded for the purposes of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.