9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n order for the noticee to respond to the same. Undisputedly, in this case, the impugned Show Cause Notice did not satisfy the said standards. Thus, it would be apposite to restore the petitioner s application for revocation of cancellation of its GST registration before the concerned officer for deciding afresh. The petitioner is granted further opportunity to respond to the Show Cause Notice dated 11.11.2022 and furnish the necessary documents in support of its claim within a period of two weeks from today - petition disposed off. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU And HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Garg Mr. Yash Gaiha, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr. Aditya Singla with Ms. S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ministrative difficulties and would voluntarily file an application for cancellation of registration once its import consignments, which were in transit, arrive at New Delhi. The petitioner explained that this was for the purpose that IGST is reflected on the portal related to the said registration. In addition, the petitioner submitted that the Show Cause Notice did not specifically indicate the reasons for proposing to cancel the petitioner s registration and, therefore, the petitioner was not in a position to offer any rebuttal with evidence. 8. The petitioner s response was not accepted and the Proper Officer (Superintendent, Ward-49) passed an order dated 13.10.2022, whereby the petitioner s GST and registration was cancelled. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner had shifted the premises as they required a smaller place, without informing the jurisdictional Commissionerate. 13. The Appellate Authority proceeded on the basis that since it was admitted that the petitioner had shifted to Sonipat, Haryana and had not submitted any documentary evidence to substantiate its claim that it was also operating from the registered place of business, the appeal was liable to be rejected. 14. The petitioner now claims that the Adjudicating Authority as well as the Appellate Authority had proceeded on an erroneous premise that the petitioner had shifted from its registered premises. He submits that the petitioner continues to retain the registered premises and is operating from the same. He states th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
