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

2025 (3) TMI 417

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in law and/or in violation of fundamental rights and/or in violation of principles of natural justice and quash/set aside the same. (c) That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to respondents to revoke the GST registration of the petitioner. (d) That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to call for records of the case. (e) That, to issue order/s, direction/s, writ/s or any other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice." 2. Relevant facts for disposal of this petition is that the petitioners herein are engaged in the business of 'supply of marbles & allied products' having 'GSTIN: 22BNOPS6836G1ZL' under the Chhattisgarh Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, 'CGST Act 2017'). Vide order dated 26/06/2023 (Annexure P-2), GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled by respondent No.2/Assistant Commissioner stating that they do not doing any business from the specified place, however, petitioners have duly submitted before respondent No.2 that they have shifted their business in the new premise .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 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 impugned order Annexure P-1 based on the fact that though the business have been found operational from new place of business but a "Red alert" notice has been issued to the petitioners due to which the GST registration is not liable for revocation, which is bad in law, because respondent no.1 has contravened the provision of Section 107 (11) of the CGST Act, 2017 in not making any inquiries against the ITC passed and/or availed by the petitioners. Section 107 (11) duly provides for confirm, modify or annul the order appealed against but the same by no means empowers the respondent no.1 add something new in the order appealed against. Hence, respondent no.1 has acted beyond the powers conferr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 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 registration which the petitioners have failed to do and this fact has been admitted by the petitioners themselves before the concerned authority as well as before this Court. As per Section 35 of the CGST Act 2017 every registered person is require to keep and maintain at his principal place of business as mentioned in the certificate of Registration a true and correct account of production or manufacture of goods, Inward and Outward supply of goods or services or both, Stocks of goods, Input tax credit availed, Output tax payable and paid and such other particulars as may be prescribed. Spot verification under Rule 25 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short, CGST Rules 2017) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... redit 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 Stones Etc. from a flat/apartment that to situated on the 2nd floor. From the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioners, it appears that every month there has been balance of stocks amounting to huge amount of money and, therefore, it is absolutely impossible for anyone to conduct a business of Granite, Marbles, Kota Stones Etc. from an aforesaid flat and to stock products of huge amounts every month. In view of above, this petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders as well as evidence/material available on record. 6. Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017 deals with the cancellation or suspension of registration. Section 29 (2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 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 under the CGST Act 2017 in which principal place of business is specified as '2nd Floor, Q-326, RDA Colony, Boriya Khurd Raipur (CG)'. A physical inspection was conducted at the place of business and the petitioner was found closed and non-fucntional at the principal place of business. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued to petitioner for cancellation of GST registration issued in favour of petitioner for violating the provisions of Rule 21 (a) of the CGST Rules 2017 i.e. not found conducting any business from the declared place. Petitioner submitted reply to show-cause notice intimating that he has changed the place of business, however, inadvertently for want of knowledge the same c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ;यवसाय स्थल का भौतिक सत्यापन प्रस्तुत किया गया तथा उनके द्वारा बताया गया कि फर्म मे०जगदम्बा मार्बल का स्टॉक ग्राम- टेमरी, एकता नगर, माना कैम्प पर दर्शित पाया गया। जानकारी के अभाव होने के कारण प्रोपराइटर मिê .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... #2381;षक के प्रतिवेदन अनुसार व्यवसाय स्थल सही पाया गया है। किन्तु प्रतिवेदक अधिकारी ने अपीलार्थी को जारी Red Alert Notice के संबंध में परीक्षण नहीं किया है। विभिन्न व्यवसाईयों को त्रुटिपूर्ण आगतकर Pass-on किये जाने के कारण Red Alert Notice ज .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s 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 out in the show cause notice and the order passed subsequently is beyond the said show cause notice, the same would amount to violation of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner would not have been aware of the new grounds or new factual elements and could never have placed his case for the above before the authority concerned. It is in this background that the Supreme Court in umpteen judgments has laid down the law that an order passed by an authority cannot go beyond the scope of the show cause notice. In fact, the Supreme Court in the case of The Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. v. Kumari Chitra Srivastava, (1970) 1 SCC 121 has categorically stated t .....

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