GST Registration Cancellation Order Quashed Due to Procedural Defects, Remanded for Fair Hearing and Detailed Notice

HC allowed the petition challenging GST registration cancellation order. The court found procedural irregularities in notice issuance and lack of reasoned order. Impugned orders were quashed and matter remanded to Assessing Officer to issue detailed show cause notice, ensuring fair hearing. Petitioner's registration remained suspended pending final proceedings, with strict timeline directives for resolution.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order of cancellation of registration on grounds of lack of hearing and reason provided.
Appeal dismissal on the ground of limitation.
Non-compliance with court guidelines for issuing cancellation notices.
Remedy sought to quash and set aside the orders and remand the matter.
Directions for the Assessing Officer to provide detailed reasons and follow timelines for further proceedings.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the order of cancellation of registration, citing lack of opportunity for a hearing and absence of reasons for the cancellation. The Appellate Authority upheld the cancellation order, dismissing the appeal on the basis of limitation. The petitioner contended that the respondent authorities were issuing cryptic notices despite court guidelines issued in a previous case. The court emphasized the importance of adherence to procedural fairness to avoid unnecessary litigation. The judgment highlighted the need for authorities to provide detailed show cause notices and reasons for cancellation, allowing dealers an opportunity to respond effectively.

The court noted that the order of cancellation lacked reasons and the appeal under the GST Act was also dismissed. As a result, the revisional power under section 108 of the GST Act could not be exercised by the respondent authorities. The court directed the quashing of the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer at the show cause notice stage. The registration of the petitioner was to remain suspended until the show cause notice was decided, with specific directions provided for the proceedings.

The court partially allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned orders and remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer. The registration of the petitioner was to remain suspended until the show cause notice stage was completed. The court clarified that it had not delved into the merits of the case and instructed the respondent authorities to pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law, ensuring detailed reasons and a fair opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. The timelines provided were to be strictly followed by both parties to expedite the resolution of the show cause notice.

---