2021 (12) TMI 832 - HC - GST

Cancellation of GST registration - harassment of the assessee - allegation of non-submission of electricity bill - requisite documents for grant of such registration - HELD THAT - Section 25 of CGST Act, provides detailed procedure to be followed by every person applying for registration. It further requires by the person to provide PAN and Aadhar details. Rule 8 and 9 provides how the application for registration has to be dealt with. Further Rule 9 suggests the manner in which verification has to be done. If on examination of the application accompanying the documents all found to be in order then approval should be granted within seven working days. In the event the officer is not satisfied with the documents annexed then inspection is provided and further clarification can be sought. In the case in hand PAN and Aadhar details as well as property receipts were provided as per the provisions of the Act and Rule. The petitioner has annexed the photocopy of the Form applied for registration as Annexure No. 1, whereas the details of PAN, Aadhar and property receipts have mentioned. PAN reference has come at page nos. 25, 28 and 29; Aadhar reference has come at page 29 and 33 as well as property reference has come at page 37 - It is clear from the records that all the documents as required under the Act and law as well as in compliance to the show cause notice were furnished by the petitioner and without pointing out any defect or short coming therein, the application should not have been rejected. The two authorities of the State have acted only with a view to harass the petitioner which cannot be accepted at any cost. This attitude of the respondents in this petition cannot be tolerated as the officers are being State functionary has to act fairly and their action must be in consonance with the provisions of the Acts as well as Rules. The writ petition is allowed with cost of ₹ 15,000/-, which shall be deposited before the High Court State Legal Services Committee, Allahabad within a period of 20 days from today.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Rejection of GST registration.
2. Compliance with Section 25 of the U.P. Goods & Service Tax Act and Rules 8 & 9 of the Goods & Service Tax Rules, 2017.
3. Requirement and submission of documents, specifically electricity bill and house tax receipt.
4. Actions of the authorities and their alignment with legal provisions.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Rejection of GST Registration:
The petitioner applied for GST registration on 17.08.2021. Following an inspection on 15.09.2021, the petitioner received a notice to submit additional documents. Despite submitting the required documents, the registration application was rejected on 23.09.2021 for non-submission of an electricity bill. The petitioner’s appeal against this rejection was also dismissed on 28.10.2021.

2. Compliance with Section 25 of the U.P. Goods & Service Tax Act and Rules 8 & 9 of the Goods & Service Tax Rules, 2017:
The petitioner argued that they complied with Section 25 of the Act and Rules 8 & 9 by submitting the PAN card, Aadhaar card, and house tax receipt. Section 25 outlines the procedure for registration, requiring PAN and Aadhaar details. Rules 8 and 9 detail the application process and verification procedures. The petitioner’s documents were in order as per these provisions.

3. Requirement and Submission of Documents:
The petitioner submitted the PAN card, Aadhaar card, and house tax receipt as required. The authorities issued a notice on 15.09.2021 asking for an electricity bill or house tax receipt. The petitioner submitted the house tax receipt, but the application was rejected for not submitting the electricity bill. The court noted that the notice allowed submission of either document, and the petitioner complied by providing the house tax receipt.

4. Actions of the Authorities:
The court found that the authorities acted arbitrarily by insisting on the electricity bill despite the petitioner’s compliance with the notice by submitting the house tax receipt. The authorities failed to point out any defects in the submitted documents and rejected the application without valid reasons. The court condemned the authorities' actions as harassment and emphasized that state functionaries must act fairly and in accordance with the law.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the impugned orders dated 23.09.2021 and 28.10.2021, directing the authorities to pass an appropriate order based on the available material within seven working days. The court also imposed a cost of ?15,000 on the respondents, to be deposited with the High Court State Legal Services Committee, Allahabad, within 20 days. The respondents were given the liberty to recover the cost from the erring officer, and a compliance report regarding the deposit was to be filed within 45 days.