Premise-based food licensing and GST registration cannot be granted exclusively where co-owners dispute the right to run the business.

A food business licence under the Food Safety and Standards Act is premise-based and tied to lawful operation by the food business operator, so licensing authorities cannot grant or renew it exclusively in favour of one rival claimant while joint ownership and competing rights over the premises remain unresolved. The note also states that GST registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act depends on a lawful supplier carrying on taxable business, so registration cannot be granted or continued in favour of one claimant alone where the right to run the business from the premises is disputed. Exclusive licensing or registration is therefore barred until the parties settle their inter se rights or apply jointly.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a licence under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is granted in respect of premises and not exclusively to a person, and whether the authority can refuse or decline renewal where the premises is jointly owned and the rival claims remain unresolved; (ii) Whether registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 can be granted or continued in favour of one rival claimant to the exclusion of the other when the right to run the business from the premises is disputed.

Issue (i): Whether a licence under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is granted in respect of premises and not exclusively to a person, and whether the authority can refuse or decline renewal where the premises is jointly owned and the rival claims remain unresolved.

Analysis: Section 31 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, read with the licensing regulations and the prescribed licence format, shows that a food business licence is issued for the authorised premises and the person responsible for compliance as food business operator. The statutory scheme contemplates licensing of the food business in relation to premises, with the licence subsisting only so long as the business is lawfully run in accordance with the Act and regulations. Where the premises is jointly owned and both claim the right to operate, the licensing authority cannot lawfully confer the licence in favour of one to the exclusion of the other without resolution of the underlying dispute.

Conclusion: The licence is premise-based, and the authority was justified in refusing to grant or renew it in favour of one claimant alone while the dispute over the premises remained unresolved.

Issue (ii): Whether registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 can be granted or continued in favour of one rival claimant to the exclusion of the other when the right to run the business from the premises is disputed.

Analysis: Under Section 22 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, registration is attracted in respect of a supplier carrying on taxable business. The definition of supplier in Section 2(105) presupposes a person lawfully supplying goods or services. If the right to operate the restaurant itself is in dispute and lawful operation is not established, the turnover relied upon for registration cannot be treated as arising from a business legitimately run by one claimant to the exclusion of the other.

Conclusion: GST registration could not be granted or continued in favour of either rival claimant alone while the dispute over the right to run the business remained unsettled.

Final Conclusion: The dispute over the restaurant premises disables exclusive licensing or registration in favour of either claimant, and both authorities may act only in accordance with the statutory scheme until the parties resolve their inter se rights or make a joint application.

Ratio Decidendi: A food business licence under the licensing regime is attached to authorised premises and lawful operation, and GST registration depends on a lawful supplier carrying on taxable business; where rival co-owners dispute the right to operate the business, exclusive grant of licence or registration to one alone is not permissible.

---