Judicial Intervention Secures GST Registration Review, Mandates Comprehensive Examination and Timely Resolution for Business Operator

HC allowed petitioner's writ challenging GST registration cancellation. Court directed revenue authorities to comprehensively examine petitioner's business existence, decide revocation application within six weeks, and provide necessary GST portal access. The order mandates a fair opportunity for the petitioner to address Input Tax Credit discrepancies and potentially restore registration.

---

---

Issues:
The judgment involves the cancellation of GST registration of a petitioner, subsequent application for revocation, discrepancy in Input Tax Credit, and the need for proper examination by the concerned officer.

Cancellation of GST Registration:
The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled based on a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 02.06.2023, which alleged the petitioner was non-existent at its registered address. The cancellation was preceded by a visit from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) officials who did not find the petitioner at the premises. The petitioner had applied for a change of address prior to the SCN, but the application was rejected as the query remained unfulfilled. The cancellation order was issued on the premise that the petitioner was non-existent at its principal place of business.

Application for Revocation:
The petitioner applied for revocation of the cancellation order on 02.08.2023, providing further information regarding the change of its principal place of business. However, the application was not decided, and instead, the Proper Officer sought reconciliation of Input Tax Credit for multiple financial years. The petitioner claimed difficulty in responding to this due to lack of access to the GST Portal post the cancellation of registration.

Court's Direction:
The Court directed the concerned officer to decide on the revocation application after examining all aspects of the petitioner's existence at its principal place of business. The officer was instructed to conclude the proceedings within six weeks and restore the registration if the petitioner was found existent at its original place of business. Additionally, the respondents were directed to provide all necessary returns and information to enable the petitioner to respond to the communication regarding Input Tax Credit.

Conclusion:
The writ petition was allowed, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the petitioner's situation before the cancellation of GST registration and providing access to necessary information for the petitioner to address the discrepancies in Input Tax Credit.

---