Stay updated
THE HON’BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Cylos Consulting Pvt. Ltd. V/s Union Territory of Chandigarh, decided on 17-12-2024
THE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF – Varun Kumar Arya V/s Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax , decided on 31-7-2024
THE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Alibaba Enterprises V/s Sales Tax Officer Class-II AVATO Ward-83, decided on 1-8-2024
GST Registration Cancellation was set aside and the Petitioner was granted personal hearing and access to GST portal to upload reply and documents to SCN.
Synopsis: Court directed Department to intimate the total outstanding statutory dues till date of GST RC cancellation and restore such registration upon payment of dues by petitioner when Registration certificate cancelled due to non-furnishing of returns in compliance of the provisions of Section 29(2)(c) of the GST Act, 2017 for a continuous period of 6 or more months.
GST RC cancellation order was passed with retrospective effect from 01.07.2017 for the only reason set out in the impugned SCN that Principal place of business not found at the time of field visit, was quashed for violating the principles of natural justice.
The Hon’ble Telangana High Court, in the case of M/s. Nice Enterprises held that the Department should not issue the SCN merely to the Assessee by simply mentioning the provisions of Section 29(2)(e) of the CGST Act. The SCN should contain sufficient factual and elementary details so as to enable the Assessee to file effective reply, such notices violate the principle of natural justice. Hence, the Impugned SCN was set aside.
The SCN and GST cancellation order lacked proper reasoning and showed non-application of mind, therefore, were aside.
The SCN lacked specific details or evidence to support the allegations of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of fact and the extremely short time given to respond violated the petitioner’s right to natural justice. Thus, the authorities were directed to restore GST registration.
Yes, the Honorable High Court of Calcutta in the case of Limton Metals Ltd. dismissed the writ petition challenging orders for cancellation of registration. The petitioner argued that the notice did not comply with section 29 provisions, as it did not specify the reasons for the cancellation and the notice mentioned “Others” under the reasons column, which the petitioner claimed was insufficient disclosure.