The High Court held that assessment orders without a Document Identification Number (DIN) are invalid, not void. They remain operative until set aside. Taxpayers must challenge them promptly—delay (laches) can defeat relief. In this batch, all writ petitions were dismissed for delay, despite the missing DIN.
Background
Under the GST regime, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) introduced the concept of a Document Identification Number to promote transparency and accountability. This requirement came through Circular No. 122/41/2019-GST (dated 05.11.2019) and later clarified by Circular No. 128/47/2019-GST (dated 23.12.2019).
According to these circulars, every order, notice, or communication issued by GST authorities must contain a DIN. Any communication without a DIN would be considered invalid and deemed never to have been issued.
The Supreme Court in Pradeep Goyal vs. Union of India (2022) 63 GSTL 286 (SC) also highlighted the importance of this circular and the mandatory nature of DIN.
The Dispute
In this batch of writ petitions, the petitioners argued that the assessment orders passed against them did not contain a DIN. They relied on earlier rulings like Cluster Enterprises vs. Deputy Assistant Commissioner (2024), where the absence of DIN had led to orders being set aside.
Some of the petitions included:
M/s. Suguna Enterprises (2025 TAXONATION 2227 (ANDHRA PRADESH)) – Challenged assessment order dated 30.04.2024 citing absence of DIN.
W.P. No. 20704/2025 (Anil Kumar Pulivedala) – Challenged entire proceedings including assessment, penalty, and interest orders dated 16.10.2024.
W.P. No. 21087/2025 (Gadu Sanyasi) – Opposed order dated 22.04.2024 for imposing tax under reverse charge without DIN.
Petitioners’ Argument
Absence of DIN makes the orders void and non-existent in law.
If an order is void, it cannot be enforced, and therefore, delay in filing petitions should not matter.
Setting aside such orders would benefit both the department (by ensuring proper re-assessment) and taxpayers (by avoiding arbitrary enforcement).
Revenuer’ Argument
Orders without DIN are not void but only invalid.
Unless struck down by a Court, such orders remain enforceable.
Taxpayers must approach the Court within a reasonable time. Delay in filing writ petitions cannot be ignored.
Court’s Observations
Circulars issued under Section 168 of CGST Act are binding on tax authorities, but they do not automatically render an order void.
Orders without DIN are invalid but not non-existent — they continue to operate unless set aside by a Court.
Delay in approaching the Court cannot be excused merely by claiming ignorance or alleging improper service, especially since GST portal uploads are recognized as valid service of orders.
Accepting such excuses would open floodgates for endless litigation against years-old orders.
The Verdict
After considering the arguments, the Court ruled that:
Since there was significant delay in challenging the orders, and no satisfactory explanation was provided, the writ petitions cannot be entertained.
Accordingly, all writ petitions were dismissed.
No costs were imposed, and pending miscellaneous applications were closed.
GST Case Law Suguna Enterprises, Anil Kumar Pulivendala and Gadu Sanyasi Versus The Assistant Commissioner St
Citation-2025 TAXONATION 2227 (ANDHRA PRADESH) (Click here to read full case law)
SUBSCRIBE GST E-LIBRARY (INDIA'S HIGHEST GST CASE LAW DATA)
FOR MORE UPDATE ON GST/ IT JOIN OUR FREE WHATSAPP GROUP BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK https://chat.whatsapp.com/C8VB6F6VHme3A061UDQKhj
