2024 (12) TMI 727 - HC - GST

Cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner - petitioner has not filed return for a continuous period of six months - non-service of SCN - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - In the circumstances of the case wherein, the claim made by the petitioner is that it is covered under Section 10 of the Act, 2017 and as such, issuance of notice itself is incorrect, and the order impugned dated 15.3.2024 ordering for cancellation of registration is non speaking, the same is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the jurisdictional authority, the petitioner would appear before the said authority and file response to the show cause notice dated 6.2.2024 raising all pleas as sought to be raised in the present petition, including the fact that it is registered under the provisions of Section 10 of the Act, 2017 - Petition disposed off by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge against cancellation of GST registration based on non-filing of returns for six months; Petitioner's claim of being registered under Composition Scheme and covered under Section 10 of the Act, 2017; Allegation of non-application of mind in passing cancellation order; Request for quashing and setting aside the cancellation order due to incorrect application of provisions.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenged the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration due to non-filing of returns for six months. The petitioner, registered under the Composition Scheme and claiming to fall under Section 10 of the Act, 2017, argued that the notice and subsequent cancellation order were based on incorrect provisions. The petitioner contended that the order failed to consider the specific provisions applicable to their case, as they were required to file quarterly and annual returns, not monthly returns as mentioned in the notice.

The petitioner highlighted that the cancellation order did not provide a reasoned explanation and reflected a lack of application of mind. The petitioner argued that the provisions cited in the order were not applicable to their situation, as they fell under Section 10 of the Act, 2017. The petitioner emphasized that the show cause notice and the subsequent order were issued under a mistaken impression regarding their tax status, leading to an incorrect decision.

In response, the counsel for the respondents pointed out the absence of specific averments in the petition regarding the petitioner's status under Section 10 of the Act, 2017. However, the counsel acknowledged that the cancellation order lacked a detailed rationale. The court, considering the petitioner's claim and the deficiencies in the cancellation process, quashed and set aside the cancellation order. The court directed the petitioner to appear before the jurisdictional authority, raise all relevant arguments, including their registration under Section 10, and respond to the show cause notice.

The court remanded the matter back to the authority for a fresh decision in accordance with the law. The authority was instructed to hear the petitioner's submissions and issue a new order after considering all relevant aspects, including the petitioner's status under Section 10. The petitioner was directed to appear before the authority on a specified date to present their case. With these directions, the court disposed of the petition, providing the petitioner with an opportunity to address the issues raised and seek a fair reconsideration of the cancellation decision.