An adjudicating authority exercising statutory power to cancel tax registration must record clear reasons for its decision. As a matter of natural justice and fair procedure, an order devoid of reasoning, even when passed ex-parte, is illegal and constitutes a non-speaking order lacking application of mind.

.JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

1. The petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition, preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, on the premise that her GST Registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax [CGST] Act, 2017 has been cancelled by an Order dated 26.12.2024 pursuant to issuance of a Show Cause Notice dated 12.08.2024. The assail is made inter-alia on the grounds that the manner in which the GST Registration has been cancelled is arbitrary and the impugned Order of cancellation has been passed by the Proper Officer without due application of mind.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is a person from the Scheduled Tribe of Arunachal Pradesh and has been carrying on her business in the name of her proprietorship firm, M/s Ngarsi Enterprise, represented by its sole proprietor. It carries on small business of cybercafé and its principal place of business is at Main Market, Post Office & Police Station – Pasighat, District – East Siang, Pin-791102, Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioner got itself registered as a proprietorship firm under the Central Goods and Services Tax [CGST] Act, 2017 [‘the CGST Act’ for short]. It is stated that when the petitioner applied for registration, the petitioner was issued Registration Certificate in Form GST REG-06 with Registration no. 12LQBPS2030N1ZQ and the Registration Certificate to that effect was issued on 20.10.2021.

3. The petitioner was issued the Show Cause Notice on 12.08.2024 by the Proper Officer asking her to show cause as to why the registration issued to her under the CGST Act should not be cancelled due to failure on her part to furnish timely returns under Section 39 of the CGST Act. The petitioner was thereby, asked to furnish a Reply within thirty working days from the date of service of the Show Cause Notice. The petitioner was also directed to appear before the Proper Officer on a specified date. It was further mentioned that if the petitioner would fail to furnish a Reply within the stipulated date or to appear for personal hearing on the appointed date and time, the case would be decided ex-parte on the basis of the available records and on merits. Another Notice in Form GSTR-3A under Rule 68 of the CGST Rules was issued to the petitioner on 24.09.2024 as a defaulter under Section 46 of the CGST Act. The petitioner was thereby asked to furnish the returns within fifteen days failing which the petitioner would be assessed under Section 62 of the CGST Act.

4. Thereafter on 26.12.2024, the impugned Order came to be passed whereby the petitioner’s GST Registration has been cancelled w.e.f. 30.08.2024.

5. I have heard Ms. Kipa Yamak, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. O. Jerang, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India [DSGI] for the respondent no. 1; and Mr. T. Kipa, learned Standing Counsel, CGST for the respondent nos. 2 & 3.

6. Ms. Yamak, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in response to the Show Cause Notice, which was uploaded in the common portal, the petitioner could not submit a reply due to reasons beyond her control as it escaped her notice as she could not access it due to failure to retrieve the login credentials. No notice was served upon the petitioner manually. It is submitted that the petitioner came to learn about the Show Cause Notice when the time for filing the Reply was already over and the impugned Order dated 26.12.2024 had al