Appellant's expired Food Safety license leads to GST registration cancellation while respondent maintains valid registration status

HC disposed of appeal concerning GST registration cancellation involving unpartitioned property dispute. Appellant's Food Safety license expired January 2018, while respondent's license expired May 2021. Neither party held valid license during petition pendency. Court found GST registration cancelled for appellant on April 2021 but remained registered under respondent. HC directed both parties may approach concerned authority for license issuance/renewal, leaving authority free to determine which party meets licensing criteria without imposing restrictions contrary to statutory provisions.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to judgment on License issued under Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006.
2. Cancellation of Goods and Sales Tax registration.
3. Dispute over ownership and operation of Samci Restaurant.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the judgment regarding the License issued under the Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006, for Samci Restaurant. The appellant claimed to be the sole proprietor of the restaurant and objected to the issuance of the license to respondent no. 5. The court noted the dispute over ownership and operation of the restaurant between the parties. The court emphasized that until the dispute is settled, the authority can withhold granting or renewing the license. The parties were advised to resolve the dispute amicably or through court intervention. The court directed that both parties could apply for a license jointly if they meet the legal requirements.

2. The appellant's Goods and Sales Tax registration was canceled, and a new registration was issued to respondent no. 5. The appellant contended that the cancellation was based on a fraudulent application filed by an employee-accountant. The court observed that the cancellation was done based on the appellant's request, and there was no evidence of third-party fraud in the online process. The court directed the concerned authority to consider the appellant's application for revocation of the cancellation order, ensuring a fair decision.

3. The dispute over the ownership and operation of Samci Restaurant led to legal actions and petitions. The court found that neither party had a valid license to operate the restaurant during the legal proceedings. The court set aside certain paragraphs of the judgment that restricted the competent authority's powers to grant a license. Both parties were allowed to approach the authority for license issuance or renewal. The court instructed the authority to decide on individual claims within a month, without being influenced by previous court observations. The operation of Samci Restaurant was prohibited until the rightful party obtained the license.

In conclusion, the court addressed the complex legal issues surrounding the ownership, licensing, and operation of Samci Restaurant, providing a framework for resolving the disputes and ensuring fair consideration by the competent authority.

---