2023 (1) TMI 880 - HC - GST

Cancellation of registration certificate of petitioner - cancellation on the ground that the petitioner did not remain present even though, admittedly, the petitioner submitted the reply and no opportunity of hearing was given - HELD THAT - It is quite apparent from the material, which is placed on the record that the cancellation of registration certificate is contrary to law. It is a non-speaking order, which cancelled the registration on the ground that he did not remain present even though he did submit the reply. Thus, cancellation of registration without assigning any reason is wholly mechanical and stereotyped. He has explained that it is already on record that he has shifted to another premises from 01.01.2022. The day the premises was visited, he was not intimated and assuming that it may not be necessary, the fact remains that he has explained and when he appeared before the respondent authority along with the documents so far as the financial transactions are concerned. It needs to be pointed out that the petitioner concerned had shifted to another premises and, hence, he simply cannot be found at the old address. In absence of any intimating during the spot visit, if it was difficult for him to remain present because of the shift in the office, the cancellation of registration with the retrospective date is fully impermissible. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to cancellation of registration certificate under GST Act without hearing the petitioner and without providing reasons.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the order confirming cancellation of the registration certificate under the GST Act, alleging non-speaking order and lack of opportunity for a hearing. The petitioner's registration was suspended from a specific date, and despite explanations provided during spot visits, the appeal was dismissed. The petitioner sought various reliefs, including quashing the impugned orders and restoring the registration certificate.

The respondent authorities conducted spot visits at the petitioner's business premises, noting the absence of stock, accounts, or infrastructure. The petitioner argued that the cancellation was based on minor procedural issues and lack of notice during the spot visit. The petitioner shifted to new premises, but cancellation was proposed due to non-filing of returns and non-functioning at the old place. The petitioner's responses and attempts for revocation were not considered adequately.

During the proceedings, the petitioner's advocate and the Assistant Government Pleader presented arguments. The Court noted the petitioner's relocation to new premises and the lack of intimation during the spot visit. The cancellation without proper reasons and considering the petitioner's explanations was deemed impermissible. The Court referred to a relevant legal precedent and granted the petition, setting aside the cancellation orders and restoring the petitioner's registration certificate.

In conclusion, the Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned orders, and restored the petitioner's registration certificate. The judgment emphasized the importance of providing reasons for cancellation and considering the petitioner's circumstances, especially regarding the relocation to new premises. The decision highlighted the need for fair procedures and proper justification in such matters under the GST Act.