TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Registration cancellation order quashed for lack of reasons and violation of natural justice principles</h1> <h3>M/s Archana Thru Ms. Archana Versus State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Tax And Registration, Lucknow And Others</h3> M/s Archana Thru Ms. Archana Versus State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Tax And Registration, Lucknow And Others - TMI Issues:1. Cancellation of registration of the petitioner without following due process.2. Dismissal of the appeal on grounds of delay.3. Violation of constitutional rights under Article 19 and Article 14.Analysis:Issue 1: The petitioner challenged the cancellation of their registration without proper application of mind and reasons as required under section 29 of the UPGST Act. The court noted that the cancellation order lacked justification and reasons, which are essential for any judicial or administrative decision. The absence of reasons rendered the order unjustifiable in the eyes of the law, contravening established legal principles and previous court judgments emphasizing the importance of providing reasons for such decisions.Issue 2: The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed based on delay, invoking section 107(4) of the Act. The court found that the doctrine of merger would not apply in this case due to the circumstances surrounding the dismissal. The respondent argued that the appeal was time-barred, leading to its rejection. However, the court observed that detailed reasons for the delay were not considered, highlighting a lack of procedural fairness in the decision.Issue 3: The petitioner contended that the cancellation of registration and dismissal of the appeal infringed upon their constitutional rights guaranteed under Article 19 and Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The petitioner argued that the actions taken had a negative impact on their right to conduct business and were executed without due application of mind, violating constitutional mandates. The petitioner cited relevant court judgments to support their argument regarding the necessity of providing reasons and ensuring compliance with constitutional provisions.In conclusion, the court quashed the order of cancellation of registration passed by the Assistant Commissioner and directed the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice within three weeks. The Adjudicating Authority was instructed to reconsider the matter, provide a fair hearing to the petitioner, and issue a fresh order based on the defense presented. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness, justification for decisions, and upholding constitutional rights in administrative and judicial proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
