Just a moment...

⚠✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback✕

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
╳
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
✕
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :

Print Options

+ Post an Article
Post a New Article ✕
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search ❮
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date
PrevPreviousNextNext

Co-owner consent is not required for availing GST registration

Bimal jain
Allahabad High Court: Co-owner consent unnecessary for GST registration if ownership is proven by documents like electricity bills. The Allahabad High Court ruled that co-owner consent is not required for GST registration if the primary ownership document, such as an electricity bill, lists the owner's name. A petitioner sought to cancel a tenant's GST registration, arguing that co-owner consent was missing. The court observed that for GST registration, documents like property tax receipts or electricity bills are sufficient for proving ownership. In this case, the electricity bill named the registered owner, negating the need for additional consent. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, affirming that such documentation suffices for GST registration purposes. (AI Summary)

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) in the case of SATYA DEV SINGH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA THRU. SECY. MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI AND 4 OTHERS - 2025 (1) TMI 297 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT held that the co-owner consent is not required when in the primary document of proof of ownership such as electricity bill, owner’s name is mentioned.

Facts:

Satya Dev Singh (“the Petitioner”) filed a writ petition against order dated December 14, 2023 and August 09, 2024 (“the Impugned Order”) passed by the Revenue Department wherein the Petitioner being co-owner of the property filed an application for cancellation of GST Registration granted to the Tenant of the property, has been rejected. The said application has been filed on the ground that the consent of the co-owner has not been obtained.

Issue:

Whether co-owner consent is required for availing GST registration?

Held:

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) in the case of SATYA DEV SINGH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA THRU. SECY. MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI AND 4 OTHERS - 2025 (1) TMI 297 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT held as under:

  • Observed that, as per Appellate Authority, following documents would be required for the purpose of GST registration:
    1. For Own premises - Any document in support of the ownership of the premises like latest Property Tax Receipt or Municipal Khata copy or copy of Electricity Bill.
    2. For Rented or Leased premises - A copy of the valid Rent / Lease Agreement with any document in support of the ownership of the premises of the Lessor like Latest Property Tax Receipt or Municipal Khata copy or copy of Electricity Bill
    3. For premises not covered in (a) and (b) above - A copy of the Consent Letter with any document in support of the ownership of the premises of the Consenter like Municipal Khata copy or Electricity Bill copy. For shared properties also, the same documents may be uploaded.'
  • Noted that, the electricity bill was existing in the name of registered owner, as such there was no requirement of consent letter.
  • Opined that, based on the point (a) stated above, there is sufficient compliance of the order passed as the owner’s name has been duly mentioned.
  • Held that, the writ petition is dismissed.

 

 (Author can be reached at [email protected])

Goods and Services Tax - GST
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles