2022 (5) TMI 788 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - Cancellation of registration of petitioner - HELD THAT - The record shows that the order of cancellation of registration qua the petitioner was passed on 06.08.2021 - thereafter, an application for revocation of cancellation of registration was filed on 21.10.2021, whereupon yet another show cause notice dated 17.11.2021 was issued to the petitioner. It is in this show cause notice dated 17.11.2021, wherein the respondent/revenue indicated that the reason for rejection of revocation of cancellation of registration was that when physical verification was conducted on 05.07.2021, the unit was found non-existent at the registered premises. A perusal of the said reply shows that the petitioner appears to have indicated to the respondent/revenue about the change in address. It appears that despite this information having been furnished, the petitioner's application for revocation of cancellation of registration was rejected, on 08.12.2021 - the petitioner preferred an appeal with the Appellate Authority, which met with the same fate. Prima facie, it appears to be a case of non-application of mind, and breach of the principles of natural justice. List the matter on 26.05.2022.

Summary

Issues: Challenge to order dated 22.02.2022 passed by Joint Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax (Appeals-I), Delhi regarding cancellation of GST registration.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was flawed for various reasons, pointing out that the show cause notice issued by the revenue only mentioned "Others" as the reason for proposing cancellation of GST registration.

2. The record revealed that the registration cancellation order was passed on 06.08.2021, followed by an application for revocation on 21.10.2021. Subsequently, a show cause notice dated 17.11.2021 stated that physical verification found the unit "non-existent" at the registered premises, leading to rejection of the revocation application on 08.12.2021.

3. Despite the petitioner informing about the change in address in their reply to the show cause notice, the application for revocation was still rejected. The petitioner's appeal to the Appellate Authority met the same fate, indicating a lack of consideration of relevant information and failure to provide an opportunity to be heard.

4. The Court observed that the matter prima facie appeared to involve non-application of mind and a breach of the principles of natural justice. The concerned officer should have considered the petitioner's reply and allowed their authorized representative to present their case.

5. Consequently, the Court issued notice to the respondent/revenue, and the respondent's counsel accepted the notice, indicating a willingness to provide instructions. If instructions are received to resist the petition, a counter-affidavit will be filed before the next hearing scheduled for 26.05.2022.