Assessment Order Quashed for Lack of Assessing Officer’s Signature; Proceedings Set Aside.

Assessment Order Quashed for Lack of Assessing Officer’s Signature; Proceedings Set Aside.

Issue:

Whether a pre-show cause notice, show cause notice, and assessment order (specifically the final order in Form GST DRC-07) are valid if the assessment order does not bear the signature of the Assessing Officer, as required by law.

Facts:

For the period 2021-2022, the assessee challenged a pre-show cause notice, a show cause notice, and an assessment order issued in Form GST DRC-07. The primary ground for the challenge was that the assessment order did not contain the signature of the Assessing Officer. The revenue department itself confirmed that the assessment order indeed lacked the Assessing Officer’s signature.

Decision:

In favor of the assessee: The court held that the signature of the Assessing Officer on the assessment order is a fundamental requirement, and its absence renders the assessment order invalid. Therefore, the impugned proceedings (implicitly including the assessment order, and by extension, the preceding notices leading to it) were set aside.

Key Takeaways:

• Fundamental Requirement of Signature: An assessment order is a formal statutory document that creates a demand against a taxpayer. As such, it must be properly authenticated. The signature of the Assessing Officer is a critical element of such authentication, signifying that the officer has applied their mind and formally issued the order.
• Invalidity Due to Lack of Signature: The absence of the Assessing Officer’s signature is not a mere technicality but a substantive defect that goes to the root of the order’s validity. It renders the order invalid and unenforceable.
• Sections 160 and 169 (CGST Act):
  • Section 160 deals with the rectification of mistakes apparent from the record, but a missing signature is not merely a mistake to be rectified; it impacts the very issuance and authenticity of the order.
  • Section 169 specifies modes of service of notice and orders. While it addresses how an order is served, it implicitly assumes that the order itself is a validly issued document. A missing signature means the document itself is not properly issued as an “order.”
• Consequence of Invalidity: When an order is found to be invalid due to such a fundamental defect, it is typically set aside, meaning the demand created by it is quashed. The revenue would then usually have the liberty to initiate fresh proceedings from the appropriate stage, provided the limitation period for that action has not expired.
• Ensuring Due Process: This ruling reinforces the importance of tax authorities strictly adhering to procedural requirements to ensure due process and the legal validity of their actions.
• Unsigned Orders in Digital Era: While many processes are digitized, the principle of formal authentication, whether through a physical signature or a verifiable digital signature, remains essential for the legal sanctity of tax orders.