Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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 :
+ 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

Article 19(1)(g) as a Constitutional Shield Against Arbitrary GST Registration Cancellation

Abhishek Raja
GST registration cancellations must follow fair procedure under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 14 rights Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution protects the fundamental right to carry on any trade or business, serving as a constitutional safeguard against arbitrary cancellation of GST registration. Courts have ruled that such cancellations without proper notice, evidence, or opportunity to defend violate Article 19(1)(g), Article 14, and principles of natural justice. Judicial decisions from various High Courts have emphasized that GST registration cancellation must be a reasoned, proportionate action, not a punitive or mechanical measure. Tax authorities are required to act fairly and provide justifications, while taxpayers have the right to challenge unjust cancellations to protect their business interests under constitutional guarantees. (AI Summary)

The Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, while streamlining indirect taxation in India, has also led to instances where businesses face abrupt registration cancellations, severely impacting their operations. However, the Constitution of India provides a robust safeguard—Article 19(1)(g), which guarantees every citizen the fundamental right 'to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.'

Recent judicial pronouncements have reinforced that arbitrary cancellation of GST registration violates this constitutional right, apart from being contrary to principles of natural justice and Article 14 (right to equality). Courts have intervened where tax authorities have acted disproportionately, denying taxpayers a fair opportunity to defend themselves.

Key Judicial Precedents Upholding Article 19(1)(g) in GST Matters

1. M/s A.M. Enterprises Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. - 2024 (9) TMI 1485 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that cancelling GST registration merely for an alleged violation of Rule 86B (restriction on use of ITC for payment of output tax) was a disproportionate punishment. The Court ruled that such cancellation was arbitrary, violating Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g), as it crippled the petitioner’s business.

2. M/s. Maharashtra Scrap Versus Secretary Department Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance, Union Of India And Others - 2024 (3) TMI 437 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

The Bombay High Court set aside a GST registration cancellation order where the Revenue Department failed to provide specific details of the alleged fraud. The Court emphasized that denying the right to business without proper justification violates Article 19(1)(g) and principles of natural justice.

3. M/s. Rooban Agencies, Rep. by its proprietor, A. Stanley Rooban S/o. Aruldhas Versus The Assistant Commissioner (GST Appeal), The Assistant Commissioner (GST) - 2024 (4) TMI 760 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

The Madras High Court observed that cancelling registration without proper notice or opportunity for hearing amounts to a 'capital punishment' for small-scale traders. The Court highlighted that such actions directly infringe upon the fundamental right to carry on trade under Article 19(1)(g).

4. Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece Center Versus The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), The Assistant Commissioner (Circle), Salem Bazaar - 2022 (2) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

The Madras High Court ruled that GST laws cannot be interpreted in a manner that denies citizens their constitutional right to trade and commerce. The Court reiterated that tax authorities must ensure fairness while exercising powers under GST laws.

5. M/s S.S. Enterprises Lucknow Thru. Its Proprietor Raj Kumar Singh Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax Deptt. Lko And 2 Others - 2024 (3) TMI 1093 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

The Allahabad High Court held that cancellation of GST registration has severe consequences on the right to business under Article 19(1)(g). Therefore, any such order must be a reasoned and speaking order, complying with natural justice principles.

Conclusion: Judicial Safeguards Against Arbitrary GST Actions

The judiciary has consistently upheld that GST registration cancellation cannot be a mechanical or punitive action—it must be based on proper reasoning, evidence, and adherence to principles of natural justiceArticle 19(1)(g) serves as a constitutional shield protecting businesses from arbitrary state action.

Taxpayers must be aware of their rights and challenge unjust cancellations, while authorities must ensure that regulatory actions do not unreasonably restrict trade and commerce.

-----

Abhishek Raja Ram
9810638155

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles