9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 1054 - HC - GSTCancellation of GST registration of petitioner - non-speaking order - HELD THAT - In the present case, the respondent authority has not disputed the fact that while issuing Show-cause notice for cancellation of Registration, necessary documents were not supplied and the notice is cryptic. Therefore, it was not possible for the petitioners to give reply to the said Show-cause notice. It is not in dispute that while passing the impugned order for cancellation of registration, the respondent authority has not assigned any reason and thus, the order passed by the respondent authority is not a speaking order - both Show-cause notice dated 24.11.2021 as well as the order dated 13.12.2021 deserve to be quashed and set aside. Petition allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the Show-cause notice dated 24.11.2021. 2. Validity of the order dated 13.12.2021 cancelling the petitioners' GST registration. Summary: Issue 1: Validity of the Show-cause notice dated 24.11.2021 [5] The petitioners, engaged in trading base oil and registered under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, challenged the Show-cause notice dated 24.11.2021 issued by the respondent authority proposing to cancel their registration. The notice alleged that the registration was obtained by means of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts without providing specific details or supporting documents. The petitioners were unaware of the notice due to not logging on the GST portal, and no documents were received in support of it. [6] The petitioners argued that the issue is covered by the decision of this Court in Aggrawal Dyeing and Printing Works Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors and Sona Metals vs. State of Gujarat, where similar Show-cause notices were quashed due to lack of specific details and supporting documents. [10] The Court observed that the Show-cause notice did not provide detailed information on how the petitioners committed fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts. The notice was deemed vague and insufficient for the petitioners to respond effectively, similar to the cases cited by the petitioners. Issue 2: Validity of the order dated 13.12.2021 cancelling the petitioners' GST registration[7] The respondent's counsel acknowledged that no speaking order was passed at the time of cancellation and agreed that the authority could start fresh proceedings in accordance with law if the order was quashed. [11] The Court noted that the respondent authority did not supply necessary documents with the Show-cause notice, making it cryptic and difficult for the petitioners to respond. The cancellation order dated 13.12.2021 lacked assigned reasons and was not a speaking order. [12] Based on these observations, the Court concluded that both the Show-cause notice dated 24.11.2021 and the order dated 13.12.2021 deserved to be quashed and set aside. Final Order:[13] The petition was allowed, and both the Show-cause notice dated 24.11.2021 and the order dated 13.12.2021 were quashed and set aside. The respondent authorities were granted liberty to issue a fresh notice with detailed reasons and provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners before passing an appropriate order in accordance with law. The registration of the petitioners was directed to be restored forthwith.
|
