Tax Registration Cancellation Overturned: Procedural Lapses Invalidate Authority's Order, Petitioner Granted Opportunity to Respond Within Three Weeks

The HC allowed the writ petition challenging tax registration cancellation, finding procedural defects in the tax authority's orders. The court set aside previous orders due to lack of reasoned decision-making and directed the petitioner to file a reply to the show-cause notice within three weeks, mandating fresh adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner with proper application of mind.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the cancellation of registration under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the lack of application of mind in passing the orders dated October 17, 2019, and July 12, 2022.

Cancellation of Registration:
The petitioner challenged the order for cancellation of registration dated October 17, 2019, and the subsequent order dated July 12, 2022, passed in appeal under Section 107 of the Act. The petitioner argued that the cancellation was done without proper application of mind, as evident from discrepancies in the order itself regarding the submission of a reply by the petitioner. The petitioner relied on previous court judgments emphasizing the need for reasons to be provided in such orders, as the absence of reasons violates the principles of natural justice and the right to run a business as guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

Application of Mind and Judicial Review:
The petitioner contended that the order cancelling the registration lacked proper application of mind, which is essential for any quasi-judicial decision affecting the rights of individuals. The court referred to previous judgments highlighting the importance of providing reasons in administrative or quasi-judicial orders. The court held that the order dated January 7, 2023, cancelling the registration, did not provide any reasons for such a drastic action, thereby failing to meet the requirements of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order and directed the petitioner to file a reply to the show-cause notice within three weeks for fresh adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner.

Judicial Precedents and Legal Principles:
The court considered previous judgments, such as Surendra Bahadur Singh v. State of U.P. and others, and M/s Namo Narayan Singh v. State of U.P., to emphasize the necessity of providing reasons in judicial proceedings. Drawing on these precedents, the court concluded that the orders cancelling the registration in the present case were non-reasoned and therefore liable to be set aside. The court directed the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice and mandated a fresh adjudication process with proper opportunity for the petitioner to present their defense.

Conclusion:
In light of the lack of application of mind and the absence of reasons in the orders for cancellation of registration, the High Court quashed and set aside the original order dated October 17, 2019, and the appellate order dated July 12, 2022. The court allowed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a reply to the show cause notice within three weeks for a fresh adjudication process by the Assistant Commissioner, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal principles.

---