9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ginal authority, and there was a specific finding that the petitioner was not conducting business in the premises mentioned in the certificate of registration. It is also seen from Ext.P4 that, according to the statement recorded from the landlord of the petitioner, the premises in question were leased out to the petitioner for conducting iron and steel business from 2012 to May 2017, and thereafter no business had been conducted by the petitioner in the said premises. It is also seen that the premises were thereafter leased out by the landlord to another person, who had no relation whatsoever with the petitioner. The original authority therefore recorded that it is evident that the details provided at the time of migration from the registr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of goods or services or both in violation of the provisions of the Act, or the rules made thereunder . The reply filed by the petitioner to Ext.P2 is on record as Ext.P3. In Ext.P3, the petitioner stated as follows: I. Clarification for- Rule 21(a)-person does not conduct any business from declared place of business: As explained earlier, our business operations have ceased temporarily w.e.f. 01.10.2022 and we are not having any business w.e.f. 01.10.2022. The Place of Business declared in our GST Registration is a rented place and there were some disputes with the landowner relating to rental payments, due to which the rental payments for a few months fell due. We intend to continue our business when the business conditions improve. II. Cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is thus that the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the registration of the petitioner was cancelled for two reasons. It is submitted that the first reason was that, according to the officer, the petitioner had stopped business at the place mentioned in the certificate of registration. The second reason was that the petitioner had issued certain fake invoices without actual supply of goods. It is submitted that both these reasons are unsustainable, and the petitioner was actually conducting business at the premises in question till October, 2022. It is submitted that the petitioner had stopped business owing to financial difficulties. It is submitted that there is no material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt recorded from the landlord of the petitioner, the premises in question were leased out to the petitioner for conducting iron and steel business from 2012 to May 2017, and thereafter no business had been conducted by the petitioner in the said premises. It is also seen that the premises were thereafter leased out by the landlord to another person, who had no relation whatsoever with the petitioner. The original authority therefore recorded that it is evident that the details provided at the time of migration from the registration under the VAT to GST were false and the registration of the petitioner is therefore liable to be cancelled. Following the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1859/2023, the Appellate A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er in the name of the appellant and those issued by the appellant. The invoices and document produced by the appellant proves that the appellant is engaged in bill trading. The appellant receives the goods as per supply invoices and subsequently supplies the same, without unloading as there is no business place. So tax Invoices and E-way Bills cannot be accepted as proof of evidence as it can be issued without a business place. c) Bank statement of account- Bank statement produced by the appellant cannot prove the existance of business place during the disputed period May 2017 to 24-06-2023. The address in the bank statement will be the address given at the time of opening the account. The address will not change unless changed by the accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts also did not prove the existence of the business place at room No. IX/205. To conclude, none of the documents produced by the appellant could not establish the existance of business place of the appellant at room No: IX/205, at Kandassankadavu. The appellant did not held or obtained any statutory documents like panchayath license, which is a mandatory one to run the business. In addition to above, the Senior Enforcement Officer, Enforcement Squad, SGST Department, Thrissur and the respondent himself, on enquiry have found that the appellant has no business place at room No. IX/205, since May 2017. So, I find the appellant have obtained registration by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, enabling the respondent t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
