9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d place, is found to be correct, the petitioner s GST Registration would then be restored. This is also subject to the petitioner applying for rectification of its principal place of business in accordance with law, immediately after its registration is restored. The present petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to verify whether the petitioner has been carrying on its business from its additional place of business [18, Suraj Kund Road, Pul Pehladpur, South-East Delhi, Delhi 110044] within a period of three weeks from date. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA For the Petitioner Through: Mr Vineet Bhatia and Mr Bipin Punia, Advocates. For the Respondents Through: Mr Shubham Tyagi, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T registration certificate. However, those premises were not inspected. The petitioner claimed that it continued to operate from the said premises. 6. The said application was also rejected on the ground that the reasons for revocation were not covered under the Amnesty Scheme, which was notified by the notification dated 31.03.2023. 7. The petitioner responded to the Show Cause Notice dated 26.06.2023, inter alia, accepting that the notification referred to in the Show Cause Notice dated 26.06.2023 did not apply for reasons other than non-filing of the GST Returns. However, the petitioner claimed that the reasons for seeking revocation of cancellation were genuine and it was conducting the day to day business from its additional place of b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for a change of its principal place of business [103, Block-A, Kamla Nagar, South-East Delhi, Delhi-110007] to the address as reflected as its additional place of business [18, Suraj Kund Road, Pul Pehladpur, South-East Delhi, Delhi 110044]. However, that application was not accepted as the petitioner s additional place of business was already reflected in the records. The said records were then carried forward and the petitioner s GST Registration also reflected its principal place of business, which is admittedly erroneous as the petitioner was not carrying on its business from those premises. 15. It is clear from the above that the petitioner was at fault in securing a GST Registration by incorrectly reflecting its principal place of bus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
