9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Services Tax Rules, 2017. A perusal of the aforesaid Rule would demonstrate the mode and manner in which the physical verification of the business premises in certain cases are required to be carried out. Admittedly, in this case, the petitioners were not notified of the attempt made by the respondents to identify the petitioner no. 1 s place of business. Although, Mr. Banerjee, by placing reliance on the endorsement made by the postal authorities on a letter dated 17th January, 2024 attempts to establish that the petitioner no. 1 is not in existence, such a procedure to establish the existence or non-existence of a company is unknown in law. Although, the procedure adopted by the respondents to cancel the petitioner no. 1 s registration un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er no. 1 s registration under the said Act is liable to be cancelled. Under the column reasons, others have been mentioned. According to the petitioners, the word others has not been specified as a ground for cancellation of registration under the said Act. It is submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is a registered company and has been regularly filing returns with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and such fact would corroborate from a copy of the print out from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs which is annexed at page 34 of the writ petition. According to the petitioners, despite the fact that the petitioner no. 1 had responded to the aforesaid show cause notice, the respondents have purported to cancel the said registration of the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs conferred on the proper officer by virtue of Section 29 (2) (e) of the said Act. As such no interference is called for. 5. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record. Although, a lot of argument has been advanced by the learned advocate representing the petitioners that the show cause notice did not identify and/or specify the reasons it would, however, transpire from the show cause, that it referred to certain supportive documents which were also made over to the petitioner no. 1 along with the aforesaid show cause notice. From the document appearing at page 37 of the writ petition, being a communication issued by the Assistant Commissioner, it would transpire that a prima fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business location could not be located by the respondents and since, the petitioners complain of procedural irregularity in connection with the physical verification of the petitioner no. 1 s business premises, this Court to test out the bona fide of the petitioners, had sought for the views of the petitioners whether the petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate for a further inspection to be conducted by the respondents in accordance with the Rule 25 of the said Rules. Unfortunately, the petitioners advocate insists that unless the order as aforesaid is set aside, the petitioners are not ready and willing to permit the respondents to inspect the petitioner no. 1 s business premises. 7. Having regard to the aforesaid, and the relucta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
