9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the mere existence of such a power would not in itself be sufficient to sustain its invocation. What we seek to emphasise is that the power to cancel retrospectively can neither be robotic nor routinely applied unless circumstances so warrant. When tested on the aforesaid precepts it becomes ex facie evident that the impugned order of cancellation cannot be sustained.' It is foiund that there has been an abject failure on the part of the concerned authorities to assign even rudimentary reasons for retrospective cancellation. Since the only allegation against the petitioner was that it was non-existent, which was sufficiently addressed by the petitioner in his reply by claiming that the tax payer had to go to Rajasthan due to ill health of his father, and at the relevant time when visit was scheduled by the Department, the tax payer was travelling to Rajasthan and owing to this, the business place of the tax payer was closed and it was presumed that the tax payer is non-existent. The temporary suspension of business activity on account of ill health would not warrant cancellation of taxpayer s GST registration. The impugned order dated 27.08.2024 is completely silent with regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersonal hearing on the appointed date and time, the case will be decided ex parte on the basis of available records and on merits. Please note that your registration stands suspended with effect from 06/02/2024. Kindly refer the supportive document attached for case specific details. Place: Delhi Date: 06/02/2024 5. The registration ultimately came to be cancelled retrospectively w.e.f. 02.09.2017 in terms of an order dated 25.05.2024, and which is being extracted herein below: Order for Cancellation of Registration This has reference to show cause notice issued dated 06/02/2024. The effective date of cancellation of your registration is 02/09/2017. 3. It may be noted that a registered person furnishing return under sub-section (1) of section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017 is required to furnish a final return in FORM GSTR-10 within three months of the date of this order. 4. You are required to furnish all your pending returns. 5. It may be noted that the cancellation of registration shall not affect the liability to pay tax and other dues under this Act or to discharge any obligation under this Act or the rules made thereunder for any period prior to the date of cancellation whether or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, at any stage of proceeding adjourn the hearing for reasons to be recorded in writing. However, no such adjournment shall be granted more than three times to a noticee. 9. The circular/instructions issued by the Department are binding on the departmental authorities. They cannot take a contrary stand and the Department cannot repudiate a circular even on the ground that it was inconsistent with the statutory provisions and thus, the effective right of being heard having been denied to the petitioner, the impugned order dated 06.02.2024 is violative of principles of natural justice. 10. The proper officer passed the impugned order dated 25.05.2024 cancelling the petitioner s GST registration with retrospective effect i.e 02.09.2017. The impugned order does not indicate any reason for cancelling the petitioner s GST registration much less from retrospective effect. The impugned order is bereft of any reason. It neither specifies the reasons for cancelling the GST registration nor gives any clue as to why it was cancelled w.e.f 02.09.2017. The retrospective cancellation of GST registration has a cascading effect inasmuch as the concerned authorities would also deny the input tax cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 03.08.2024 is due and payable by the petitioner. 14. In response to the show cause notice, petitioner filed reply dated 16.08.2024. Notwithstanding such reply, the application for revocation for cancellation of registration was rejected. The impugned order dated 27.08.2024 is reproduced below: Order of Rejection of Application for Revocation of Cancellation This has reference to your reply filed vide ARN AA0707240172891 dated 08/07/2024. The reply has been examined and the same has not been found to be satisfactory for the following reasons: 1. Reason for revocation of cancellation-Others (Please specify)-kindly deposit the demand penalty of Rs. 2438232/- against the SCN No.70/2024-25 issued under F. No. GEXCOM /AE / VRFN / Oth/ 393/2023/Mahakuber/4689 dt. 3.08.2024 issued by the Asstt. Commissioner (AE), CGST Delhi East, IP estate Delhi-02. 2. The taxpayer has not deposited the demanded amount of Rs. 2438232/- as pointed out in SCN no. 70/2024-25 dt. 03.08.2024 issued by AS(AE) CGST Delhi East. Further the taxpayer has also not joined the investigation carried out by Anti-Evasion branch therefore it is requested to get NOC from Investigating authority in their case. Therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
