2024 (11) TMI 256 - HC - GST

Cancellation of GST registration - no reasons for cancellation provided - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The respondent authorities rejected the application for revocation of cancellation contrary to the directions issued by this Court. Respondent no.3 also rejected the appeal without referring to the details submitted by the petitioner - In the present case, order of cancellation of registration is therefore, passed without assigning any reason by the respondent authority and penalty was imposed without any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and appeal filed by the petitioner under section 107 of the GST Act against the order of rejection of application for revocation of cancellation is also dismissed. As the appellate authority has dismissed the appeal of the petitioner, respondent authority will not be able to exercise revisional power under section 108 of the GST Act. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the appellate authority as well as order of cancellation of registration are required to be quashed and set aside and accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer at show cause notice stage. The petition is partly allowed by quashing and setting aside the impugned orders passed by the appellate authority as well as order of cancellation of registration and the matter is remanded back to the respondent authority at the show cause notice stage. However, registration of the petitioner shall remain suspended till the show cause notice is disposed of as per the directions given by the Court.

Summary

Issues:
1. Cancellation of GST registration and subsequent appeals.
2. Rejection of application for revocation of cancellation.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice in cancellation proceedings.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a business entity registered under the GST Acts, sought relief from the High Court to quash the cancellation of its GST registration and restore the same. The registration was initially granted on 24.05.2021, but later cancelled due to alleged discrepancies in documents. The petitioner applied for cancellation on 01.11.2021 due to business closure, but the application was rejected on 30.11.2021. Subsequently, the registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 24.05.2021 without proper notice or opportunity to be heard. The petitioner made multiple attempts to revoke the cancellation, but each application was rejected by the authorities. The final appeal was dismissed on 25.10.2023 by the Deputy State Tax Commissioner, leading to the petitioner seeking relief from the High Court.

2. The rejection of the application for revocation of cancellation was based on the grounds that the petitioner was not eligible for revocation under the Amnesty Scheme due to alleged fraud and misstatement in obtaining registration. Despite the petitioner's attempts to respond to show cause notices, the applications for revocation were consistently denied by the authorities. The High Court noted that the rejection of the revocation application was contrary to the guidelines issued in a previous case, emphasizing the importance of providing detailed reasons and opportunities for the dealer to respond before cancellation.

3. The High Court highlighted the violation of principles of natural justice in the cancellation proceedings. The order of cancellation lacked proper reasoning, imposed penalties without a hearing, and did not provide an opportunity for the petitioner to address the discrepancies. The appellate authority's dismissal of the appeal further compounded the lack of procedural fairness. In light of these deficiencies, the High Court quashed the orders of cancellation and the appeal dismissal, remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a proper show cause notice stage. The registration suspension was to continue until the show cause notice was resolved, emphasizing compliance with timelines and due process.

In conclusion, the High Court partially allowed the petition by setting aside the impugned orders and directing a reevaluation of the cancellation at the show cause notice stage, ensuring adherence to procedural fairness and providing the petitioner with a proper opportunity to respond.