9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conducted on 26.10.2023, business was found functional at the new place ie village Temri, Ekta Nagar, Mana Camp, Raipur. It is also mentioned in the report that Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Circle-3 Raipur has also recommended for revocation of registration of petitioner. Perusal of copy of notice dated 10.7.2023 (Annexure R-4) annexed along with return filed on behalf of respondents/State would show that during special drive against fake registrations, petitioner is found to be non-existent business entity and engaged in bill trading activities, and therefore, immediate action to block/recover the fraudulent income tax credits available by petitioner is recommended. There is nothing on record of this writ petition to show as to what action has been taken thereafter against the petitioner. It is well settled that it is beyond the competence of an authority to make out in favour of the department a case which the department had never canvassed and which the petitioner had never been required to meet. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhubaneswar -I versus Chambdany Industries Ltd [2009 (9) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] as also in case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld not co-operate in said physical verification as he was out of town. The respondent-authority issued a show cause notice to the petitioners on 22/06/2023 to cancel the GST registration of their firm, to which, petitioners immediately submitted the reply on the same day stating that due to lack of knowledge inadvertently they could not amend the details of new place of business in the GST portal, however, respondent No.2 did not consider the same and passed the order Annexure P-2 on 26/06/2023 and thereby cancelled the GST registration of firm of the petitioners mentioning therein that petitioners did not conduct any business from the old place of business. Thereafter, petitioners filed an appeal before respondent no.1 challenging the order Annexure P-2, to which, respondent no.1 directed the respondent no.2 to again conduct a physical verification of the new place of business of the petitioners. Respondent no.2 again conducted the physical verification of the new place of business and submitted a report on 26/10/2023 before respondent no.1 wherein mentioned that business was found operational by the petitioners in new place, however, respondent no.1 rejected the appeal by the imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s reliance upon the judgment passed by hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Neelima Misra vs Harinder Kaur Paintal and others reported in AIR 1990 SC 1402. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the submission of counsel for the petitioners and would submits that the petitioners have preferred the present Writ Petition being aggrieved by impugned orders Annexuer P-1 & P-2 whereby GST registration of the petitioners' firm has been cancelled. The petitioners were issued with a Registration Certificate wherein the principal address/place of business was mentioned as "2nd Floor, Q-326, R.D.A. Colony, Boriya Khurd, Raipur, District Raipur (CG). 492013" and said certificate was valid from 18-04-2019. As per provisions of Section 28 of the GST Act, every registered person who has been assigning with Unique Identity Number is required to inform the proper officer of any change in information furnished at the time of registration or subsequent thereto and on such application the proper officer shall ascertained the facts and approve or reject the amendment in the registration. The petitioners ought to have moved application informed GST REG-14 before the Proper Officer for amendment of his registrat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs vide order dated 26-06-2023, a 'Red Alert Notice' was issued with respect to the petitioners and as per said notice a Special All India Drive against the Fake GST Registration had been initiated on the guidelines formulated to verify the premises of suspected registrant of GST and to detect fake registration in order to thwart any unscrupulous attempts to pass on fraudulent input tax credit and prevailed tax. In this connection since the petitioners were found to be non- existing and a fake registrant. It was observed from the record that the petitioners have passed on fraudulent input tax to various parties without actual supply of goods. The detail of the recipient of such input tax credit and the amount from the fake registrant was also enclosed along with the said notice. Since the petitioners were found to be non-existing at the principal place of business, they was treated to be a fake registrant and a notice with respect to the same was issued against them. As per said notice, the petitioners had passed on fraudulent input tax credit to various parties without actual supply of goods. It is highly unlikely that a firm can carry out a business of Granite, Marbles, and Kota ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provisions of this Act, or the rules made thereunder; or (c) violates the provisions of section 171 of the Act or the rules made thereunder. (d) violates the provision of rule 10A. (e) avails input tax credit in violation of the provisions of section 16 of the Act or the rules made thereunder; or (f) furnishes the details of outward supplies in FORM GSTR-1 under section 37 for one or more tax periods which is in excess of the outward supplies declared by him in his valid return under section 39 for the said tax periods; or (g) violates the provision of rule 86B." 8. A bare reading of above will make it clear that Section 29 of the CGST Act 2017 read with Rule 21-a of the CGST Rules 2017 are the only provisions which lay down the process of cancellation and the grounds on which the proceedings can be invoked by the department for cancellation of registration. Suspension can also be done only for the same reasons. No other ground beyond the statutory mandate could be taken into consideration for cancellation of GST registration. 9. Petitioners are engaged in the business of trading of marble and allied products, they had GST registration with the respondent-department u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to him and as such, the report is incomplete. Relevant portion of the order impugned is extracted below for ready reference:- "3. अपीलाथी द्वारा प्रस्तुत आपत्ति के समर्थन में राज्य कर निरीक्षक द्वारा प्रस्तुत व्यवसायी के व्यवसाय स्थल का भौतिक सत्यापन प्रस्तुत किया गया तथा उनके द्वारा बताया गया कि फर्म मे०ज ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... यकर, वृत्त - तीन, रायपुर द्वारा भी पजीयन बहाल किया जाना प्रस्तावित किया गया है।. 4. सहायक आयुक्त, राज्य कर एवं राज्य कर निरीक्षक के प्रतिवेदन अनुसार व्यवसाय स्थल सही पाया गया है। किन्तु प्रतिवेदक अधिकारी ने अप ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in 2016 (334) ELT 577, that no new case would have been set up or decided contrary to the show cause notices and that the Department is not allowed to travel beyond the show cause notice. 13. In case of Ramlala vs. State of UP and others reported in 2023 SCC OnLine (All) 2479, it is propounded that a person must be accorded a fair chance to put up his case and therefore the authorities cannot traverse beyond the show cause notice. Relevant paragraphs are extracted herein: "9. The principle that emerges from the above judgments is patently clear that a show cause notice is required to provide details of the nature of the offence and the grounds on which the show cause notice has been issued. Furthermore, the order that is subsequently passed, based on the show cause notice, cannot go beyond the said show cause notice and cannot in any manner penalise the noticee on grounds that were not stated in the show cause notice. 10. The rationale for not allowing the respondents from going beyond the realm of the show cause notice is that the petitioner has to be given a chance to put up his case with regard to the said show cause notice. In the event, a particular case is made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nation of petitioner on the point of red alert notice when the same was not the issue in the show cause notice and also ignoring the report of the Sales Tax Officer as also recommendation of the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Circle-3 Raipur for revocation of registration of petitioner. 15. Perusal of record would show that petitioner has intimated the change of business premises to the department through GST Portal. Thereafter, on 26.10.2023 the State Tax Officer concerned conducted physical verification of the changed placed of business and petitioner is found to be conducting business from new place declared on 26.6.2023. It has also been reported that for want of knowledge, petitioner could not intimate the department about the change in place of business. The reason of cancellation of registration was that during spot verification at the principal place of business, the same was found closed and non-functioning and since the petitioner has already rectified the said defect by intimating new address of place of business to the department as well as through GST portal, which was also found operational during spot verification, therefore, in the considered opinion of this Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
