Unjustified Order: Revocation of GST Registration Due to Ambiguous Notice
Fact and issue of the case
Rule. Learned AGP Mr. Pranav Trivedi waives service of notice of rule for respondents.
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in which, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs
To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and or any other appropriate writs, order or direction for calling on records of proceedings initiated pursuant to show-cause notice dated 01.07.2022 (Annexure P1) as well as cancellation order dated 15.07.2022 (Annexure P-2) and after perusing the same be pleased to quash and set aside show cause notice dated 01.07.2022 passed by Department and cancellation order dated 15.07.2022 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Chatak 19, Ahmedabad, and be further pleased to direct restoration of registration bearing number 24FZSPM1286G1ZX
To pass an ex-parte ad interim order staying the operation, execution and implementation of the show-cause notice dated 01.07.2022 (Annexure P-1) bearing reference no. ZA240722001120I passed by Department and order dated 15.07.2022 (Annexure P-2) bearing reference no. ZA240722078106N passed by Assistant Commissioner, Chatak 19, Ahmedabad, pending the hearing and final disposal of present petition
Heard learned advocate, Mr. M.G. Nanavati for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Pranav Trivedi for the respondents.
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is registered under the Gujarat Goods & Service Tax, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “GST Act” for short). It is stated that the concerned respondent issued show cause notice dated 01.07.2022 in Form GST REG-17/31 by way of uploading the same on the portal maintained by the department. The said show cause notice was issued under Section 29 of the GST Act read with Rule 22(1) of the GST Rules, 2017. It is the case of the petitioner that no document either in the form of notice or any other document has been received by the petitioner at his registered place of his business.
It is further stated by the petitioner that notice dated 01.07.2022 simply speaks that “In case, Registration has been obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of fact.”.Except aforesaid fact, notice does not mention any other information. 6. It is also stated that thereafter, the respondent no.3 passed an order dated 15.07.2022 for cancellation of registration in Form GST REG-19 by way of uploading the same on portal maintained by the department. It is further stated that the registration of the petitioner was being cancelled pursuant to the show cause notice dated 30.06.2022, but in fact, the petitioner did not receive any such notice dated 30.06.2022 as stated in the impugned order. The petitioner, therefore, has preferred the present petition.
Learned advocate, Mr. Nanavati appearing for the petitioner submitted that the show cause notice dated 01.07.2022, copy of which is placed on record at Page No.17 of the compilation, is vague and does not refer to any particular fact much less point out so as to enable the noticee to give its reply. It is further submitted by learned advocate that even while passing impugned order passed by the respondent no.3, reasons are not assigned by the concerned respondent. Leaned advocate has referred to the order dated 15.07.2022 passed by the respondent, copy of which is placed on record at Page No.18 of the compilation. At this stage, it is also pointed out that the order dated 15.07.2022, copy of which is placed on record at Page No.19 of the compilation, was also issued to the petitioner, however in the said order also, the provision of law has been stated and except that, the respondent has failed to assign any reason for cancellation of registration of the petitioner.
Observation of the court
In the present case also, as observed hereinabove, the show cause notice dated 01.07.2022 issued by the respondent to the petitioner is very vague and cryptic. Therefore, it was difficult for the petitioner to give any reply to the said show cause notice. We are of the view that the issue involved in the present petition is covered by the aforesaid decision.
However, it is the case of the respondent that prior to issuance of the show cause notice dated 01.07.2022, in fact, the respondent issued notice on 30.06.2022, copy of which is placed on record at Page No.48 of the compilation. It is contended by learned AGP that in the said notice, specific details are provided to the petitioner so that the petitioner can give reply. However, it is not in dispute that the said show cause notice was not served by RPAD and it is the specific case of the petitioner that the notice dated 30.06.2022 has not been received by the petitioner.
It is also pertinent to note that the respondent no.3 has, thereafter, passed an order on 15.07.2022. We have gone through the said order, copy of which is placed on record at Page No.18 of the compilation. Thereafter, another order dated 15.07.2022 was also provide, copy of which is placed on record at Page No.19 of the compilation. We are of the view that in both the aforesaid orders, the concerned respondent has failed to provide specific reasons for cancellation of registration under Section 29(2) of the GST Act.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the view that both the show cause notice as well as the order dated 15.07.2022 deserve to be quashed and set aside.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The show cause notice dated 01.07.2022 and the order dated 15.07.2022 are hereby quashed and set aside. However, liberty is granted to the respondent authorities to issue fresh notice with particulars of reasons incorporated with details and thereafter to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. The concerned respondent is hereby directed to restore the registration of the petitioner forthwith. It is needless to mention that it shall be open for the petitioner to respond to such notice by filing objection/reply with necessary documents, if relied upon. It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the case of the parties. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and ruled in favour of the assessee