HC holds unsigned order is not a valid order in the eyes of law

This Tax Alert summarizes a recent ruling of the Andhra Pradesh High Court (HC) ^[1]. The issue relates to validity and enforceability of an unsigned order passed by the revenue authority. 

In the present case, the proper officer had passed an order under Section 73(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). However, the same was not signed. Assessee filed a writ petition challenging the same on the ground that the impugned order is invalid and cannot be enforced. 

Revenue contended that as per Section 160 of the CGST Act, no assessment, re-assessment, etc., initiated in pursuance of any of the provisions of the CGST Act shall 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 intent, purpose and requirement of the law.

HC observed that that the expression “any mistake, defect or omission therein” used in Section 160 will not cover omission to sign the order. An unsigned order is no order in the eyes of law and merely uploading of the same on GST portal by competent authority as per section 169 of CGST Act would not cure the defect of validity of the said order.

HC relied on its own ruling in case of A V Bhanoji Row^[2]  wherein it was held that signatures cannot be dispensed with and Section 160 and 169 would not come to rescue in such cases.

Accordingly, HC allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order.

Comments:

A similar view was taken by Bombay HC in case of Ramani Suchit Malushte [Writ Petition No. 9331 of 2022] wherein it held that an order of cancellation of GST registration will have no effect in the eyes of law in absence of it containing the digital signature of the issuing authority.

The ruling could be extended to other communications by the department like notices and summons, where the same are unsigned.

[1]  TS-596-HC(AP)-2023-GST
[2] W.P.No.2830