9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llation of registration, section 29(2) (a) to (e) is provided, but on perusal of the said section, neither there is any violation of the said section, nor any finding has been recorded by any of the authorities for cancelling the registration of the petitioner as contemplated in section 29(2) of the UP GST Act. The registration of the petitioner could only be cancelled in accordance with the provisions as contemplated in section 29(2) of the UPGST Act and not otherwise. Therefore, the impugned order dated 07.08.2019 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade - 2 (Appeal), V, Commercial Tax, Ghaziabad as well as the order dated 30.06.2018 passed by the respondent no. 3 under section 29(2)(a) of the UP GST Act are hereby quashed. Petition a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as (a), (b), (c), (d) (e), but none of the said conditions has been violated by the petitioner for which its registration can be cancelled. He further submits that the show cause notice was given with a limited purpose, but while cancelling the registration, certain new facts were incorporated, to which neither any notice, nor any opportunity was given to the petitioner to rebut. He further submits that the appeal of the petitioner was rejected, in which more new grounds were mentioned, to which again neither any notice was issued, nor any opportunity was given to the petitioner to rebut the same. He further submits that the registration can be cancelled in accordance with law as contemplated under section 29(2) of the UP GST Act. He prays ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used the record. 8. The proceedings for cancellation of registration are proceeded by a survey conducted at the business premises of the petitioner, whereafter, a show cause notice was issued for cancellation of registration on the following premise:- No Business Activity found at principal Place of Business and no account books produced at the time of SIB survey on Date. 9. A reply was also submitted by the petitioner specifically pointing out that the said ground cannot be pressed on service for cancellation of registration, but instead of dropping the proceedings, the authority proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 30.06.2018 holding therein as under:- 10. On the basis of some information, a view has been drawn against the petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pra) has held as under:- 12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in the first place, cancellation of registration has serious consequences. It takes away the fundamental right of a citizen etc. to engage in a lawful business activity. In the present case, undisputedly, the registration claimed by the assessee had been granted by the respondent authority. Therefore, a presumption does exist as to such registration having been granted upon due verification of necessary facts. If the respondent proposed to cancel the registration thus granted, a heavy burden lay on the respondent authority to establish the existence of facts as may allow for such cancellation of registration. Section 29(2) of the Act rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expression may relate may be one appearing under Clauses (c) and (d) of Section 29(2) of the Act being where a registered firm does not commence its business within six months of its registration. Other than that, the term bogus may also refer to a satisfaction contemplated by Section 29(2)(c) of the Act where registration may be cancelled if the registered firm has not furnished its return for continuous period of six months. Those conditions have not been shown to exist in this case. 14. Yet, in case the authority wanted to cancel the existing registration, it ought to have mentioned (in the show cause notice), if it proposed to cancel the registration for violation of Section 29(2)(c) of the Act or for violation of Section 29(2)(d) of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee. Correspondingly, the respondent authority deprived the assessee of the necessary opportunity to rebut the charge. 18. In view of the discussion made above, the charge levelled in the notice dated 22.07.2020 and as was reiterated in the order dated 13.08.2020 and the further notice dated 21.08.2020 are wholly, vague. Effectively, it prevented the assessee to rebut the same. The statute contemplates issuance of the notice in specified circumstances for specific grounds. Those could not be diluted or muddled or made vague by describing the assessee firm as bogus . In absence of any specific charge, the respondent authority could not be permitted to proceed to cancel the assessee's registration. Though it may remain open to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
