2024 (1) TMI 1142 - HC - GST

Cancellation of registration of petitioner - petitioner submitted that the order for cancellation of registration has been passed without any application of mind - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - In the present case, the facts are similar to one in SURENDRA BAHADUR SINGH VERSUS STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. COMMERCIAL TAX (GST) LKO. AND 2 OTHERS 2023 (8) TMI 1262 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT , wherein the appeal was barred by time under Section 107 of the Act. However, the Division Bench in Surendra Bahadur Singh's case took into consideration the original order and set aside the same being non-reasoned and allowed the petitioner therein to file reply to the show cause notice. The orders impugned herein are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the order in original dated January 18, 2023 and the appellate order dated October 12, 2023 are quashed and set aside - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the cancellation of registration under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the lack of application of mind in passing the original and appellate orders.

Cancellation of Registration:
The petitioner challenged the order for cancellation of registration dated January 18, 2023, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner argued that the cancellation order was passed without proper application of mind, as evident from discrepancies in the order itself. The petitioner's counsel pointed out that the order mentioned conflicting information regarding the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice, highlighting the lack of reasoning and application of mind in the decision-making process.

Legal Precedents and Arguments:
The petitioner's counsel relied on legal precedents, including a Division Bench judgment and a coordinate Bench judgment of the same Court, emphasizing the importance of providing reasons in judicial proceedings. The Division Bench judgment highlighted the necessity for administrative or quasi-judicial authorities to indicate reasons in their orders, as reasons are considered essential in any judicial or administrative decision. The petitioner's counsel argued that the cancellation of registration without proper reasoning violated the petitioner's right to run a business as guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

Judicial Decision:
After considering the arguments and legal precedents cited, the Court found merit in the petitioner's contentions regarding the lack of application of mind in the original and appellate orders. The Court set aside the orders dated January 18, 2023, and October 12, 2023, quashing the cancellation of registration. The Court directed the petitioner to file a reply to the show cause notice within three weeks and instructed the adjudicating authority to conduct a fresh hearing and pass a new order after considering the petitioner's defense. The Court emphasized the importance of providing reasons in administrative and judicial decisions, ensuring a fair and reasoned process.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned orders and providing directions for a fresh adjudication process. The judgment highlighted the significance of applying the principles of natural justice, including providing reasons for decisions, in administrative and quasi-judicial proceedings to uphold the rights of the parties involved.