TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Petitioner's Registration Restored: Court Quashes Orders for Lacking Reasons, Ensures Fair Hearing in GST Case.</h1> The HC quashed the original and appellate orders canceling the petitioner's registration under the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017, due to lack of reasons and ... Cancellation of registration of petitioner - Time Limitation - non-application of mind - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the facts are similar to one in Surendra Bahadur Singh's case [2023 (8) TMI 1262 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT], wherein the appeal was barred by time under Section 107 of the Act. However, the Division Bench in Surendra Bahadur Singh's case took into consideration the original order and set aside the same being non-reasoned and allowed the petitioner therein to file reply to the show cause notice. The orders impugned herein are liable to be set aside - Petition allowed. Issues involved: Challenge to order for cancellation of registration u/s 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 due to lack of application of mind and absence of reasons in the original order.The judgment addresses the challenge to the cancellation of registration order u/s 107 of the Act. The petitioner argued that the order lacked application of mind as evident from conflicting statements regarding the petitioner's reply. Reference was made to a Division Bench judgment emphasizing the necessity of reasons in administrative or quasi-judicial orders. The court noted the absence of reasons in the impugned order and set it aside, allowing the petitioner to file a reply to the show cause notice.Furthermore, the petitioner relied on a coordinate Bench judgment highlighting the importance of providing reasons in judicial proceedings. Drawing parallels to a similar case, the court emphasized the need for reasoned orders. Citing the precedent, the court set aside the original and appellate orders, directing the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice and the adjudicating authority to conduct a fresh hearing before issuing a new order.In conclusion, the court quashed the original and appellate orders, instructing the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice within three weeks. The adjudicating authority was directed to conduct a fresh hearing and issue a new order, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice and reasoned decision-making. The writ petition was allowed in favor of the petitioner.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
