JUDGEMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) Petitioner impugns order dated 23.11.2022 and Show Cause 09.12.2022. Vide Show Cause Notice dated petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why the registration be not cancelled for the following reasons:-

returns furnished by you under section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017”

Vide impugned order dated 23.11.2022, the registration of the petitioner has been cancelled with effect from the date of its Page 1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 11.01.2024 402/2024 & CM APPLs. 1819/2024, 1820/2024 ..... Petitioner COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND ..... Respondents Praveen Kumar, Advocates.

Rajeev Aggarwal, ASC with Mr. Prateek and Ms. and Show Cause .2022. Vide Show Cause Notice dated 09.12.2022, petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why the registration be returns furnished by you under section 39 of the Central Goods , the registration of the petitioner has been cancelled with effect from the date of its registration on 01.07.2017

3. We may note that though the Show Cause Notice states that petitioner failed to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months. No particulars or details have been men Cause Notice. It appears that the Show Cause Notice reason in a standard format.

4. Further, the Show Cause Notice also does not mention the quantum of returns reasons for cancellation of the GST registration retrospectively except to state that no reply to the show cause notice has been received. Both the show cause notices and the impugned order are bereft of any reasoning and particulars and are accordingly not sustainable.

5. The impugned order also seeks to cancel the registration with effect from 01.07.2017 why the registration is sought to

6. Further, the Show Cause Notice also does not put the petitioner to notice that the registration is liable to be cancelled retrospectively.

Accordingly, the petitioner had no opportunity to even object to the retrospective cancellation of the registration.

7. In terms of Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the proper officer may cancel the GST registration of a person from such date including any retrospective date, as he may 01.07.2017. We may note that though the Show Cause Notice states that petitioner failed to furnish returns for a continuous period of six particulars or details have been mentioned in the Show It appears that the Show Cause Notice reason in a standard format.

Further, the Show Cause Notice also does not mention the returns. The impugned order also does not state any reasons for cancellation of the GST registration retrospectively except to state that no reply to the show cause notice has been received. Both the show cause notices and the impugned order are bereft of any soning and particulars and are accordingly not sustainable.

The impugned order also seeks to cancel the registration with 01.07.2017. There is no material on record to show as to why the registration is sought to be cancelled retrospectively.

he Show Cause Notice also does not put the petitioner to notice that the registration is liable to be cancelled retrospectively.

Accordingly, the petitioner had no opportunity to even object to the retrospective cancellation of the registration.

In terms of Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the proper officer may cancel the GST registration of a person from such date including any retrospective date, as he may Page 2 of 4 We may note that though the Show Cause Notice states that petitioner failed to furnish returns for a continuous period of six tioned in the Show It appears that the Show Cause Notice extracts the Further, the Show Cause Notice also does not mention the . The impugned order also does not state any reasons for cancellation of the GST registration retrospectively except to state that no reply to the show cause notice has been received. Both the show cause notices and th