SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 15634


$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 06.09.2024 + W.P.(C) 12506/2024 M/S CHAUHAN CONSTRUCTION CO. THROUGH ITS PROP. RAJESH CHAUHAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr Vineet Bhatia, Advocate.
versus COMMISSIONER OF DGST AND ANR.
.....Respondents Through: Mr Aviskar Singhvi, ASC, Mr Vivek Kr Singh, Mr Naved Ahmed and Mr Shubham Kumar, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL)

1. Issue notice.

2. The learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice.

3. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the cancellation of its Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration in terms of the order dated 05.04.2021 (hereafter the impugned cancellation order). The impugned cancellation order was issued pursuant to the Show Cause Notice dated 26.03.2021 (hereafter the SCN).

4. The only reason set out in the SCN reads as under:-

“Issues any invoice or bill without supply of goods and/or services in violation of the provisions of this Act, or the rules made thereunder leading to wrongful availment or utilization of input tax credit or refund of tax.”

5. The petitioner was called upon to furnish a reply to the SCN within a period of seven working days from the date of service of the SCN. The petitioner was also put to notice that if it fails to appear for a personal hearing on the appointed date and time, the case would be decided ex parte. However, the SCN did not state any appointed date, time or venue for the petitioner to appear for the personal hearing. In addition to the above, the petitioner’s GST registration was also suspended with effect from 26.03.2021 in terms of the SCN.

6. The petitioner filed an application dated 19.04.2021 seeking revocation of the impugned cancellation order. Pursuant to the said application, the proper officer issued a Show Cause Notice dated 29.12.2021 proposing to reject the same for the following reasons:-

“Reason for revocation of cancellation - Reason for revocation of cancellation - The reason entered for revocation of cancellation is not appropriate.”

7. The petitioner was also called upon to respond to the said Show Cause Notice dated 29.12.2021 within a period of seven working days. In addition, the petitioner was also put to notice that if he fails to appear for a personal hearing on the appointed date, the petitioner’s application for revocation would be decided ex parte. However, this notice as well, did not mention any date, time or venue fixed for affording the opportunity of the personal hearing. Thereafter, by an order dated 10.01.2022, the petitioner’s application for revocation of the impugned cancellation order was rejected. The said order dated 10.01.2022 also does not set out any reason for cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration. It merely states that the petitioner had not replied to the Show Cause Notice dated 29.12.2021 within the time specified therein.

8. The petitioner appealed against the impugned cancellation order under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the CGST Act) and the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the DGST Act). However, the said appeal was also rejected on the ground that the petitioner did not appear pursuant to the notice served to the petitioner through the GST portal.

9. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner did not access the portal as his GST was suspended in terms of the SCN on 26.03.2021.

10. The petitioner once again filed an application seeking revocation of the impugned cancellation order. Once again, a Show Cause Notice dated 19.07.2023 was issued to the petitioner proposing to reject the petitioner’s application. The reasons set out in the said Show Cause Notice are set out hereunder: -

“Any Supporting Document - Others (Please specify) - Your application is not found admissible as per the notification No.03/31-03-2023. Hence cannot be considered.”

11. The petitioner was called upon to file a reply to the said Show Cause Notice within a period of seven working days from the date of service of the notice. He was also put to notice that if he did not appear for the personal hearing on the appointed date and time, his case would be decided ex parte. However, this notice did not mention any appointed date, time and venue for the personal hearing. The petitioner’s application dated 03.05.2023 for revocation

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top