The absence of reasoned orders in administrative decisions violates principles of natural justice, necessitating transparency and fairness in decision-making processes.

JUDGMENT

Piyush Agrawal, J.

Heard Mr. Pranjal Shukla for the petitioner and Mr. Rishi Kumar, learned A.C.S.C. for respondents.

2. The instant Writ Tax is being entertained by this Court in view of the fact that G.S.T. Tribunal is not functional in the State of Uttar Pradesh pursuant to the Gazette notification of the Central Government bearing number CG-DL-E14092023- 248743 dated 14.09.2023.

3. By means of present petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 20.11.2020 / 7.12.2020 and 21.1.2021 passed by respondent no. 3 and 5 respectively and the order dated 17.11.2021 passed by respondent no. 2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a proprietorship firm having G.S.T.I.N. No. 09CCBPS0675N1Z0, engaged in retail whole sale business and deposited all due tax liabilities within time without any default. He submits that on 9.11.2020, a survey was conducted on the business premises of the petitioner and thereafter notice under Section 29 (2) of UPGST Act was issued against the petitioner asking him to appear on 27.11.2020; the petitioner moved an adjournment application but without considering the grounds taken by the petitioner, the G.S.T. registration of the petitioner has been cancelled by ex parte. He further submits that the petitioner has moved a revocation application on 4.12.2020 which was also rejected by order dated 21.1.2021. He further submits that feeling aggrieved to the said order the petitioner has filed an appeal which was also rejected by the impugned order dated 17.11.2021 without assigning any reason. He prays for allowing the present petition.

5. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance the judgements of this Court in Writ Tax No. 991 of 2021 (M/s Shyam Sundar Sita Ram v. State of UP and others) decided on 20.3.2023 and Writ Tax No. 319 of 2022 (M/s Gaurav Trading Company v. State of U.P. and others) decided on 6.12.2022.

6. Per contra, learned A.C.S.C. supports the impugned order and submits that in pursuance of the notice, neither any reply nor any material was submitted, therefore, registration was cancelled. The revocation application has also rightly been rejected. He further submits that before the appellate authority, time was granted to the petitioner to appear but the petitioner chose not to appear on four dates. He further submits that as per Section 107 (9) of the Act provides for grant of three adjournments only and as the petitioner had not appeared on four occasions, therefore, ex parte order has rightly been passed. He prays for dismissal of the present petition.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the records.

8. Admittedly, the order of cancellation has been passed without assigning any reason and revocation application has also been rejected without assigning any cogent reason and thereafter appeal has also been dismissed by the impugned order. The GST registration can only be cancelled as per Section 29 of UP GST Act.

9. From the perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the same has been passed without recording any cogent reason for cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner and appellate authority has also dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner summarily without assigning any reason.

10. Reason is the heart beat of every conclusion. In the absence of reasons the order becomes lifeless. Non recording of reasons renders the order to be violative of principles of natural justice. Reasons ensures transparency and fairness in decision maki