9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (4) TMI 104 - HC - GSTSeeking revocation of the Cancellation of the GST registration retrospectively - petitioner not found functioning from the given address - HELD THAT - Petitioner submits that he has already filed a revocation petition and candidly stated that in case a fresh field visit is required, petitioner would be willing to accept the same. Thus, petition is disposed of directing the proper officer to consider the revocation petition filed by the petitioner in accordance with law as also the contention of the petitioner that an incorrect Field Visit Report has been relied upon. The Competent Authority shall pass an order within a period of two weeks from today. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
Issues involved: Impugning the retrospective cancellation of GST registration based on an incorrect Field Visit Report.
Summary: Issue 1: Retrospective Cancellation of GST Registration The petitioner challenged the order cancelling their GST registration retrospectively from 31.03.2022. It was argued that the cancellation was based on the incorrect premise that the petitioner was not operating from the registered address. The petitioner contended that the Field Visit Report, which led to the cancellation, was actually about a different entity at a different location. The petitioner had already filed a revocation petition and expressed willingness to cooperate with any further field visits if required. Issue 2: Disposal of the Petition Upon hearing the arguments, the Court issued notice to the respondents. The respondents agreed to dispose of the revocation petition filed by the petitioner within two weeks. The Court directed the proper officer to consider the revocation petition along with the petitioner's claim of reliance on an incorrect Field Visit Report. The Competent Authority was instructed to make a decision within two weeks. The petitioner was granted the right to pursue further legal remedies if unsatisfied with the Authority's decision. This judgment highlights the importance of ensuring procedural fairness in administrative decisions, especially in cases involving the retrospective cancellation of registrations based on erroneous reports. It underscores the right of the petitioner to challenge such decisions and seek redress through the appropriate legal channels.
|
