2024 (12) TMI 1508 - HC - GST

Cancellation of the Goods and Services Tax GST registration of the writ petitioner on the ground of violation of Rule 21(A) of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017 - Principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The record reveals that prior to the issuance of that SCN, the writ petitioner had filed an application for appropriate amendments being made in its GST registration consequent to the principal place of business being changed. While considering the said application, the respondents had issued a notice dated 04 September 2024 requiring the writ petitioner to furnish additional documents. In terms of that notice, a reply was to be submitted by the writ petitioner by 13 September 2024. However, prior thereto and more particularly on 12 September 2024, the respondents proceeded to reject the application for amendment. The order cannot be sustained since the same admittedly came to be passed even before the petitioner could respond. This has clearly led to a violation of the principles of natural justice. This factor alone merits the order dated 12 September 2024 being quashed and set aside. The order dated 12 September 2024 quashed subject to the petitioner furnishing all documentation as required pursuant to the notice of 04 September 2024 - petition allowed.

Summary

In the case before the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma, the petitioner sought relief through a writ of mandamus to quash a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 03.09.2024, which initiated proceedings for the cancellation of the petitioner's Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration due to alleged violations of Rule 21(A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017. The petitioner also requested an update to their business address in the respondent's database.

The court found that the petitioner had previously applied for amendments to their GST registration due to a change in the principal place of business. However, the application was rejected on 12 September 2024, before the petitioner could respond to a notice dated 04 September 2024, which requested additional documentation by 13 September 2024. The court ruled that this premature rejection violated the principles of natural justice.

Consequently, the court quashed the order dated 12 September 2024, allowing the writ petition. It directed that the petitioner must furnish the required documentation as per the notice of 04 September 2024. The application for amendment and the impugned SCN should be considered and resolved in accordance with the law. The court kept all rights and contentions of the parties open for future consideration.