DRC-07 Without Digital Signature Is Invalid | HC
- Blog|News|GST & Customs|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 6 July, 2025

Case Details: Water Tech Engineers vs. Assisstant Commissioner of CGST - [2025] 175 taxmann.com 855 (Telangana)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Sujoy Paul, ACTG. CJ. & Smt. Renuka Yara, J.
-
T.S. Murthy, Adv. for the Petitioner.
-
Dominic Fernandes, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner challenged an assessment order issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act read with Section 122(2)(b), raising a tax demand on the ground that the Form DRC-07 notice uploaded on the portal lacked the digital signature of the Proper Officer. It was contended that such omission constituted a violation of the mandatory requirements prescribed under Rule 142(5) of the CGST Rules and Section 3 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The petitioner submitted that the statutory framework mandates authentication of orders and notices by affixing the digital signature of the issuing authority, failing which such documents are rendered invalid. The jurisdictional officer under CGST filed a counter affidavit explaining the circumstances under which the unsigned Form DRC-07 was uploaded. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court of Telangana.
High Court Held
The High Court of Telangana held that when the statute prescribes a specific manner for performing a statutory act, adherence to that manner is mandatory, and any deviation renders the act invalid. It was observed that the provisions under the CGST Act, the Telangana GST Act, and the corresponding Rules explicitly require that the Proper Officer digitally sign notices and orders, including Form DRC-07. The Court rejected the explanations offered by the Department, holding that such reasons cannot override the mandatory statutory requirement. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, while granting liberty to the revenue authority in terms of precedent.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Bigleap Technologies and Solutions (P.) Ltd. v. State of Telangana [2025] 172 taxmann.com 354 (TELANGANA) (para 8), followed.
List of Cases Referred to
- Bigleap Technologies and Solutions (P.) Ltd. v. State of Telangana [2025] 172 taxmann.com 354 (TELANGANA) (para 3).
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

CA | CS | CMA