TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Registration Cancellation Overturned: Procedural Fairness Prevails, Appellant's Rights Upheld Through Proper Hearing and Comprehensive Review</h1> <h3>Santanu Mondal Versus The Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax,</h3> HC allowed appeal against registration cancellation. Appellant's registration was revoked, but returns and taxes were filed before cancellation. Court ... Rejection of application for restoration of registration - reason for rejection of application was on the ground that it has been filed beyond the stipulated period under statute - HELD THAT:- The order rejecting the application for revocation of cancellation dated 03.03.2021 is a single line order thereby stating that the assessee has not replied to the show cause notice dated 13.01.2021. However, the fact remains that before the said notice dated 09.12.2020, the assessee had filed GSTR-3B returns upto November 2019 and this was filed prior to the application for revocation of cancellation which was filed on 16.12.2020. In the considered view of this Court, the Assessing Authority, being the Assistant Commissioner, Asansol should take into consideration this fact and examine as to whether the registration of the appellant could be restored or not. Since the Appellate Authority has solely proceeded on the ground of limitation without touching the above mentioned facts, the matter should be remanded back to the original authority for fresh consideration. Appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues:1) Appeal against rejection of application for restoration of registration.2) Consideration of principles of natural justice in cancellation of registration.3) Remand for fresh consideration by the original authority.Analysis:1) The appeal was filed against the rejection of an application for restoration of registration by the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Central Excise, Siliguri Appellate Commissionerate. The appellant's registration was cancelled, and the application for revocation was made beyond the stipulated period. However, the appellant had filed returns and remitted taxes and interest before the cancellation. The appellate authority rejected the application solely based on the ground of limitation without considering the returns filed by the appellant.2) The appellant argued that the cancellation of registration was against the principles of natural justice as the assessing authority did not consider the returns and payments made by the appellant. The Court found merit in this argument and directed the Assessing Authority to re-examine the case considering the returns filed, taxes paid, and interest remitted by the appellant. The matter was remanded back to the original authority for fresh consideration, emphasizing the need to review all relevant facts before making a decision on the restoration of registration.3) The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders passed by the Appellate Authority and the Original Authority. The application for revocation of cancellation of registration was revived to the file of the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Assansol-I Division. The Assistant Commissioner was instructed to provide a personal hearing to the appellant, evaluate the returns and payments made, and issue a fresh order within six weeks in compliance with the law. The connected applications were disposed of without any costs incurred.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
