Section 64 summary assessment and the protection it lacks
An assessment without a hearing, on the ground that delay would harm revenue. It is exceptional, and it is reversible.
Section 64 permits the proper officer, with the previous permission of the Additional or Joint Commissioner, to proceed to assess the tax liability of a person on any evidence showing a tax liability coming to his notice, where he has sufficient grounds to believe that delay will adversely affect the interest of revenue. The order is in ASMT-16. On an application by the taxable person within thirty days, or on the Additional or Joint Commissioner's own motion, the order may be withdrawn if erroneous, and the officer then proceeds under Section 73 or 74.
The conditions, which are jurisdictional
Evidence showing a tax liability, coming to the notice of the officer. Not a suspicion, and not a computation from a return.
Sufficient grounds to believe that delay would adversely affect the interest of revenue. This must be recorded, and it is the condition most often absent.
Previous permission of the Additional or Joint Commissioner. Ask for it. An assessment without the recorded permission is without jurisdiction.
Where the taxable person is not ascertainable and the liability relates to goods, the person in charge of the goods is deemed to be the taxable person.
The withdrawal route
An application in ASMT-17 within thirty days of the order, or the senior officer acting on his own motion, can result in withdrawal where the order is erroneous.
This is faster and cheaper than an appeal, and it does not require a pre deposit. It should be the first step in almost every case.
The application should attack the conditions rather than the quantum: the absence of recorded grounds, the absence of permission, and the availability of the ordinary route under Section 73 or 74.
On withdrawal, the officer proceeds under Section 73 or 74, which restores the notice, reply and hearing sequence.
When to go to the High Court instead
Where recovery has already been initiated on the strength of the summary assessment, and the commercial harm is immediate.
Where the permission of the senior officer does not exist, which is a clear jurisdictional defect.
Where the order has been used as the foundation for provisional attachment, in which case both are challenged together.
What to do on Monday
Apply in ASMT-17 within thirty days as the first step, attacking the conditions rather than the quantum.
Ask in writing for the recorded grounds and the senior officer's permission.
File the appeal in parallel if the appeal limitation is close.
Where recovery or attachment has followed, challenge both together in a writ.
This page states the general position. A reader with a specific question on their own facts may write to the GST practice at AMLEGALS.
Write to the GST practiceQuestions we are asked on this
Is a hearing required before a summary assessment?
The section does not provide for one, which is why the conditions are strictly construed and the withdrawal route exists.
Do we lose the appeal if we apply for withdrawal?
No. Apply within thirty days and, if limitation for appeal is approaching, file the appeal in parallel.
How do we know whether permission was obtained?
Ask for it in writing. The order should recite it, and the absence of the recital is itself a ground.
Can a summary assessment be made for a return period already assessed?
It is meant for exceptional situations, not for return based differences. Where the ordinary route was available, the use of Section 64 is challengeable.
What happens to the tax already recovered?
On withdrawal it must be adjusted or refunded, and the proceedings restart under Section 73 or 74.
In this cluster
- GST show cause notice: how to read it, and how to answer it
- Section 73 versus Section 74: where the department overreaches, and how to prove it
- Section 74A: the unified limitation regime from FY 2024-25
- DRC-01A pre notice intimation: reply, pay, or wait?
- From DRC-01 to DRC-07: the adjudication chain in one page
- Vague and omnibus notices: how Amrit Foods, Brindavan Beverages and Oryx Fisheries decide GST demands
- Suppression of facts under Section 74: what the department must actually prove
- Personal hearing under Section 75(4): the right, and the consequence of denying it
- Orders that travel beyond the notice: Section 75(7) in practice
- Limitation for GST demands: the year by year table you should keep in every file
GST Insights is published by AMLEGALS for general information. Law stated as on 3 September 2026. Not advice on any particular set of facts; not an advertisement or a solicitation under Rule 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules. Readers with a question on their own facts may write to the GST practice of their own accord.