GST SCN Without Digital Signature Valid When RFN Exists | HC
- Blog|News|GST & Customs|
- 2 Min Read
- By Chetan Kulasri
- |
- Last Updated on 27 November, 2025

Case Details: Sahiti Agencies vs. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise [2025] 180 taxmann.com 547 (Andhra Pradesh)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- R Raghunandan Rao & T.C.D. Sekhar, JJ.
-
J.N. Venkata Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.
-
Santhi Chandra, Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a GST-registered entity, faced electronic issuance of a show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 and an order-in-original with multiple Form DRC-07 summaries for alleged tax and ITC discrepancies. It was contended that the notices and orders were invalid due to the absence of a physical or digital signatures. The petitioner challenged the issuance of a single composite SCN and order covering six tax periods, asserting that separate notices and adjudications were required for each period. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that electronic notices and orders accompanied by reference filing numbers and digital signature indicators satisfied legal requirements, and Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules applied only to registration matters, not to adjudication under Sections 73 or 74 of the CGST Act. Once the petitioner acted on the electronic notices, subsequent challenges based on the absence of signatures were impermissible. Consequently, the composite order and DRC-07 summaries were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the jurisdictional officer for fresh action after due opportunity.
List of Cases Reviewed
- New Morning Star Travels v. Deputy Commissioner (ST) [2023] 156 taxmann.com 427/79 GSTL 430 (Andhra Pradesh) (para 16) followed
List of Cases Referred to
- Kushalbhai Ratanbhai Rohit v. State of Gujarat [2014] 45 taxmann.com 250 (SC) (para 2)
- S.R.K. Enterprises v. AC Beemli [W.P. No. 29397 of 2023, dated 10.11.2023] (para 2)
- A.V. Bhanoji Row v. Asstt. Commissioner (ST) [2025] 170 taxmann.com 799/94 GSTL 430 (Andhra Pradesh) (para 2)
- New Morning Star Travels v. Deputy Commissioner (ST) [2023] 156 taxmann.com 427/79 GSTL 430 (Andhra Pradesh) (para 16).
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.

CA | CS | CMA