GST registration cannot be rejected on extraneous grounds when prescribed documents are filed and no specific deficiency is identified.

GST registration cannot be rejected on arbitrary or extraneous grounds where the applicant has furnished PAN, Aadhaar and the documents sought in the notice. Section 25 and Rules 8 and 9 require the prescribed particulars and permit rejection only if a legally cognizable deficiency in the application or supporting documents remains unremoved. Here, the applicant supplied the required identity details and a house tax receipt, which the notice itself treated as an acceptable document. Rejection based on insistence on an electricity bill, without identifying any defect in the material filed or addressing the explanation regarding possession of the premises, was unsustainable. The impugned orders were set aside and the registration matter was to be reconsidered on the existing record.

---

---

Issues: Whether rejection of GST registration was lawful when the applicant had furnished PAN, Aadhaar and house tax receipt, and whether the authorities could insist on an electricity bill despite the notice permitting house tax receipt or other business-related documents.

Analysis: Section 25 of the Act and Rules 8 and 9 of the Rules prescribe the registration procedure and require PAN and Aadhaar particulars, while Rule 9 permits rejection only when the application or documents are deficient and such deficiency remains unremoved. The record showed that the applicant had supplied the required identity particulars and had also furnished house tax receipt in response to the notice. The notice itself allowed production of recent electricity bill, house tax copy or any other document relating to the business place. The authorities nevertheless rejected the application without identifying any defect in the house tax receipt and without dealing with the clarification regarding possession of the premises. The insistence on electricity bill, despite compliance with the notice and the statutory requirements, was unsustainable.

Conclusion: The rejection of registration was illegal and the assessee was entitled to relief.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the registration matter was directed to be decided afresh on the material already available, with costs imposed on the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi: Registration under GST cannot be rejected on arbitrary or extraneous grounds when the applicant has furnished the statutorily required particulars and the documents sought in the notice, unless a legally cognizable deficiency is specifically identified and dealt with by a reasoned order.

---