Order Date – 06 May 2025

Parties: Sandip Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand, through Commissioner of State Tax, Commercial Tax Department, The Additional Commissioner of State Tax, The Joint Commissioner of State Tax, The State Tax Officer and The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax.

Facts –

• The Petitioner, Sandip Kumar Singh, contended that Form GST DRC-01A dated 06.12.2022, Show Cause Notice dated 29.04.2023 under Section 73 of the Jharkhand GST Act, and Assessment Order dated 31.07.2023 (Annexure-7) for FY 2021–2022 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax does not bear the signature of the issuing authority which is mandatory as per Rule 26(3) of the (Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax) Rules, 2017 thus rendering them invalid.

Issue –

• Whether the assessment order and the preceding notices issued under Section 73 of the JGST Act are valid without being digitally signed as mandated by Rule 26(3) of the JGST Rules?

Order –

• The Hon’ble High Court observed that though, counsel for the respondents sought to sustain the same contending that Annexure-7 which is the impugned order contains the signature of the 5th respondent, court does not find any merit in the said contention for the reason that the preceding intimation being DRC-01A and the show cause notice under section 73 dt. 29.04.2023 do not bear the digital signature of the respondent and, therefore, are vitiated. Consequently, Annexure-7 is also vitiated. 
• Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure-7 and 8 are both set-aside but liberty is granted to the respondents to initiate proceeding afresh in a proper manner, give opportunity to the petitioner to reply to the intimation/show cause notice and then pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.