Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (9) TMI 1291

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt at the time of physical verification is ex facie erroneous. The respondents conclusion is premised solely on the basis of purported enquiries made from the nearby shop owners . However, the Field Report does not mention the name of the said shop owners or any other details. It is difficult to countenance that a taxpayer s registration can be cancelled solely on the basis of some general queries/enquiries from random persons, of which there is no record. In this case the petitioner s premises are found to be in existence and the sign board outside the premises also bears the petitioner s GSTIN. The Field Report also encloses a photograph of a person in front of the premises of the petitioner - the same establishes that the petitioner was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning a Show Cause Notice dated 22.12.2023 (hereafter the impugned SCN) whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why his registration not be cancelled. The reason set out in the impugned SCN reads as under: 1 As per letter GEXCOM/AE/MISC/764/2023/PT dated 06.11.2023 issued by Deputy Commissioner, AE, CGST, DW, New Delhi, during the physical verification principal place of business fund non existent. The cancellation of GSTIN is initiated under section 29 of CGST Act,2017. 5. The petitioner was called upon to furnish a reply to the impugned SCN within a period of seven working days from the date of service of the said notice. He was also called upon to appear before the pr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... etrospective effect from 05.05.2022. The said order did not mention any reason whatsoever for cancelling the petitioner s GST registration. It merely refers to the Show Cause Notice dated 07.08.2023. 9. In the aforesaid context, the petitioner applied for revocation of the order dated 25.08.2023, which was allowed by an order dated 30.10.2023. 10. Notwithstanding that the order cancelling the petitioner s registration was revoked by the proper officer on 30.10.2023, the proper officer once again issued the impugned SCN. 11. It is in the aforesaid background that the petitioner filed the present petition impugning the impugned SCN. The present petition was listed before this Court for the first time on 19.01.2024. It is the petitioner s case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... again inspected on 23.01.2024. The Field Visit Report dated 23.01.2024 (hereafter the Field Report) filed by the respondents indicates that the petitioner s premises were found to be in existence. It was also found that stock belonging to the petitioner was stored in the premises. The signboard outside the premises also clearly mentions Umesh Traders and mentions the petitioner s GSTIN. However, the petitioner was not present at the premises during the time of physical verification. 13. It is stated that the petitioner did not come to the premises even after the concerned officer contacted him telephonically. However, a lawyer appeared and handed over the Rent Agreement, the petitioner s Aadhar Card, Pan Card and Tax invoice. Apparently, th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the photograph is the petitioner s employee. 16. In our view, the same establishes that the petitioner was in possession of the premises in question at the material time. The proper officer entertains an apprehension that the petitioner was non-existent at the principal place of business three or four days prior to the date of the physical inspection. It is the petitioner s contention that the shop in question was lying closed and was opened four or five days before the date of the physical inspection as, prior to that, the petitioner s GST registration was suspended. 17. In the aforesaid circumstances, we consider it apposite to direct the petitioner to file a response to the impugned SCN along with all documents relied upon by him so a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates