9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (9) TMI 380 - HC - GSTViolation of principles of natural justice - order cancelling the registration of the petitioner has been passed mechanically without application of mind and without assigning any reason - appeal preferred by the petitioner dismissed on the ground of delay - HELD THAT - Admittedly from the perusal of the order dated 23.07.2022. it transpires that no reason has been assigned for cancellation of the registration of the petitioner - The reasons are heart and soul of any judicial and administrative order. In absence of the same the order cannot be justified in the eye of law. Further since the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed on the ground of delay, this Court finds that the doctrine of merger will have no application considering the facts and circumstances of the present case. In M/S CHANDRA SAIN, SHARDA NAGAR, LUCKNOW THRU. ITS PROPRIETOR MR. CHANDRA SAIN VERSUS U.O.I. THRU. SECY. MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI AND 5 OTHERS 2022 (9) TMI 1047 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT this Court has held ' In the present case from the perusal of the order dated 13.02.2020, clearly there is no reason ascribed to take such a harsh action of cancellation of registration. In view of the order being without any application of mind, the same does not satisfy the test of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as such, the impugned order dated 13.02.2020 (Annexure - 2) is set aside.' The order dated 23.07.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, respondent no.4 is hereby quashed - Petition allowed.
Issues:
1. Cancellation of registration of the petitioner without following due process. 2. Dismissal of the appeal on grounds of delay. 3. Violation of constitutional rights under Article 19 and Article 14. Analysis: Issue 1: The petitioner challenged the cancellation of their registration without proper application of mind and reasons as required under section 29 of the UPGST Act. The court noted that the cancellation order lacked justification and reasons, which are essential for any judicial or administrative decision. The absence of reasons rendered the order unjustifiable in the eyes of the law, contravening established legal principles and previous court judgments emphasizing the importance of providing reasons for such decisions. Issue 2: The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed based on delay, invoking section 107(4) of the Act. The court found that the doctrine of merger would not apply in this case due to the circumstances surrounding the dismissal. The respondent argued that the appeal was time-barred, leading to its rejection. However, the court observed that detailed reasons for the delay were not considered, highlighting a lack of procedural fairness in the decision. Issue 3: The petitioner contended that the cancellation of registration and dismissal of the appeal infringed upon their constitutional rights guaranteed under Article 19 and Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The petitioner argued that the actions taken had a negative impact on their right to conduct business and were executed without due application of mind, violating constitutional mandates. The petitioner cited relevant court judgments to support their argument regarding the necessity of providing reasons and ensuring compliance with constitutional provisions. In conclusion, the court quashed the order of cancellation of registration passed by the Assistant Commissioner and directed the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice within three weeks. The Adjudicating Authority was instructed to reconsider the matter, provide a fair hearing to the petitioner, and issue a fresh order based on the defense presented. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness, justification for decisions, and upholding constitutional rights in administrative and judicial proceedings.
|
