2023 (2) TMI 821 - HC - GST

Writ Petition Allowed: Show Cause Notice and Registration Cancellation Quashed for Lack of Specific Reasons under Natural Justice

The HC allowed the writ petition, quashing the show cause notice and the order canceling the petitioner's registration certificate for non-filing of ... Cancellation of registration certificate of petitioner - non-filing of return for a continuous period of six months - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It is deemed appropriate to entertain this petition essentially following the decision in the case of AGGARWAL DYEING AND PRINTING WORKS VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 OTHER (S) [2022 (4) TMI 864 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. The controversy there in the writ application was whether the show cause notice seeking cancellation of registration and the consequential order cancelling the registration under the GST Act was valid and sustainable in the eyes of law. The Court not only had examined the scheme of the Act but had also following various decisions of the Apex Court particularly on the necessity of giving reasons by a body or authority in support of the decision held that the absence of reasons renders an order indefensible and unsustainable particularly when it is subject to the appeal or revision. It also has amplified the decision of the KRANTI ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. VERSUS MASOOD AHMED KHAN [2010 (9) TMI 886 - SUPREME COURT] where the Court has held that insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the vital principles of justice that justice must not only be done but it must also appear to be done as well. It would also operate as valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi judicial or even administrative power. It also reassures that discretion has been exercised by the decision maker on relevant grounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations. The reasons have virtually become indispensable component of a decision making process Observing the principles of natural justice vide judicial, quasi judicial or even the administrative bodies. They would also facilitate the process of judicial review by the superior Court. Therefore, it has been held that the assignment of the reason is imperative in nature and speaking order doctrine mandates assigning the reasons which is heart and sole of the decisions and that must be the result of independent re-appreciation of evidence adduced and documents produced in the case. Applying these principles, the Court held that the State and its officers ought to have at least incorporate the specific details of the contents of the show cause notice which any prudent person can respond to as otherwise it would to fail to respond to such show cause notice which is bereft of details thereby making the mechanism of issuing show cause notice only a formality. In the instant case, what one finds is that it was a case of non-filing of return for six months. Assuming that requirement of filing of the return and the consequences for non-filing of return for six months is apparent in statutory provision, the very nature of notice has been held by this Court in the decision of Aggrawal Dyeing as cryptic and unsustainable under law. The writ application is allowed quashing the show cause notice and the consequential order cancelling registration with liberty to the respondent to issue fresh notice with particular reasons incorporating the details and a reasonable opportunity of hearing to writ applicant and to pass appropriate speaking order. Issues Involved:1. Legality and validity of the cancellation order dated 24.03.2021.2. Challenge to the show cause notice dated 15.03.2021.3. Violation of principles of natural justice.4. Impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the petitioner's business.5. Requirement and consequences of non-filing of GST returns.6. Adequacy of reasons provided in the show cause notice and cancellation order.7. Procedural lapses and technical glitches in issuing notices and orders.8. Appellate authority's handling of delay in filing appeals.Detailed Analysis:1. Legality and Validity of the Cancellation Order:The petitioner challenged the order dated 24.03.2021, which cancelled his GST registration retroactively from 01.07.2017. The petitioner argued that the cancellation was done without providing specific reasons or grounds, thus violating principles of natural justice. The court noted that the cancellation order was cryptic and lacked the necessary details and reasons, making it indefensible and unsustainable.2. Challenge to the Show Cause Notice:The petitioner also contested the show cause notice dated 15.03.2021, which suspended his registration immediately. The notice was issued under Rule 22(1) of the GST Rules and Section 29 of the GST Act for not filing returns for six consecutive months. The court found that the notice was devoid of specific details and particulars, making it difficult for the petitioner to respond effectively.3. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons in administrative decisions, citing various judgments, including the case of Aggarwal Dyeing and Printing Works vs. State of Gujarat. It held that the absence of reasons in the show cause notice and cancellation order violated the principles of natural justice. The court reiterated that justice must not only be done but also appear to be done, and that reasons are essential to ensure transparency and fairness in decision-making.4. Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic:The petitioner argued that his business was severely affected by the Covid-19 pandemic, leading to financial hardship and the belief that there was no requirement to file GST returns post-June 2020. The court acknowledged the petitioner's situation and noted that the pandemic had indeed impacted businesses, which should be considered while making administrative decisions.5. Requirement and Consequences of Non-Filing of GST Returns:The respondent argued that the filing of GST returns is mandatory and that non-filing for six months warrants cancellation of registration under Section 29 of the GST Act. The court, however, highlighted that even if non-filing of returns is a statutory requirement, the notices and orders must still provide specific reasons and details to be valid.6. Adequacy of Reasons Provided:The court found that both the show cause notice and the cancellation order lacked adequate reasons and specific details. The notice merely stated that the petitioner had not filed returns for six months, and the cancellation order did not determine any payable amount. The court held that such vague notices and orders are unsustainable under law.7. Procedural Lapses and Technical Glitches:The court addressed the issue of procedural lapses and technical glitches in issuing notices and orders. It directed that until the technical issues are resolved, the department should issue physical notices and orders with all necessary details and send them by registered post. The court expressed frustration over repeated procedural lapses leading to unnecessary litigation.8. Appellate Authority's Handling of Delay:The court criticized the appellate authority for mechanically disposing of appeals on the ground of delay without considering the pandemic's impact and the transitional phase of GST implementation. It emphasized the need for a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing, even in the absence of specific statutory provisions.Conclusion:The court allowed the writ application, quashing the show cause notice and the consequential cancellation order. It granted liberty to the respondent to issue a fresh notice with specific reasons and details, providing a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to respond. The court underscored the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice and procedural fairness in administrative actions.