2022 (9) TMI 1204 - HC - GST

Rejection of the revocation application - Non-speaking order - earlier proceedings were dismissed on the ground that an appellate remedy is available under the Act - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The order passed by the authority cancelling the application for revocation is devoid of reasons. None of the grounds raised by the appellant has been dealt with. It is not clear as to why the department has been dragging the appellant for such a long period, i.e. from August, 2021. If, according to the respondent, there is any adverse material, then a proper show cause notice should have been given to the appellant and her objection should have been invited and further affording an opportunity of personal hearing, a speaking order should have been passed. It is high time that the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes takes note of the manner in which the subordinate officers have been dealing with cases, more particularly matters concerning cancellation of registration and it would augur well to conduct an orientation programme to enable to the officers to be sensitized as to how and on what manner the proceedings should be initiated and how it should be dealt with and how speaking order should be passed. In the instant case there has been total violation of principles of natural justice, the order of rejection of the revocation application is a non-speaking order without considering the vital facts, the Court is inclined to set aside such an order. The order passed in the writ petition is set aside and the writ petition is allowed and the order of rejection of the application for revocation dated 21st March, 2021 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original authority - Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge against rejection of revocation application.
2. Violation of principles of natural justice in cancellation of registration.
3. Lack of reasoning in authority's order.
4. Availability of alternative remedy.

Issue 1: Challenge against Rejection of Revocation Application
The appellant challenged the rejection of the revocation application dated 21st March, 2022, which was dismissed in the earlier proceedings citing the availability of an appellate remedy under the Act. The appellant contended that the rejection order lacked reasons and failed to address the grounds raised. The High Court found the order cancelling the application for revocation to be devoid of reasons and a violation of principles of natural justice. The Court set aside the rejection order, emphasizing the necessity for a proper show cause notice, opportunity for rebuttal, and a speaking order.

Issue 2: Violation of Principles of Natural Justice in Cancellation of Registration
The case involved multiple instances of cancellation and revocation of registration, with the appellant alleging procedural irregularities and lack of adherence to principles of natural justice. The High Court noted the prolonged proceedings since August 2021 and criticized the authorities for not providing a clear basis for the cancellations. The Court highlighted the importance of affording the appellant a fair opportunity to respond and be heard before passing any adverse orders. The Court set aside the rejection order due to the total violation of principles of natural justice.

Issue 3: Lack of Reasoning in Authority's Order
The High Court observed that the authority's order cancelling the revocation application lacked reasoning and failed to address the appellant's submissions adequately. The Court emphasized the necessity for authorities to provide clear reasons for their decisions, especially in cases involving cancellation of registration. The Court directed the original authority to issue a comprehensive show cause notice, supported by relevant documents, and grant the appellant sufficient time to respond. The Court stressed the importance of passing a speaking order based on merit and in accordance with the law.

Issue 4: Availability of Alternative Remedy
The High Court addressed the dismissal of the writ petition by the Single Bench on the ground of the availability of an alternative remedy. However, the Court found that in this case, there had been a total violation of principles of natural justice, leading to the setting aside of the rejection order. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the earlier order, and remanded the matter to the original authority for a fresh consideration in compliance with the principles of natural justice. The Court emphasized the need for sensitization of officers on procedural matters related to cancellations under the Act.