GST registration cancellation upheld where field enquiry and supporting material showed no substantiated business premises or lawful occupancy.

Cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2)(e) was upheld because a field enquiry indicated that the declared business premises did not support the claimed business existence, and the petitioner did not make an effective reply to the show cause notice or before the appellate authority. The documents relied on, including the leave and licence agreement and electricity bills, did not conclusively displace the finding that lawful occupancy and actual business presence were unsubstantiated. As the order rested on material with evidentiary support and was not shown to be perverse, the challenge to cancellation failed and the writ petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2)(e) of the GST law and the appellate refusal to interfere were liable to be set aside on the ground of non-consideration of the petitioner's documents and alleged mechanical exercise of power.

Analysis: The registration was cancelled on the basis of a field enquiry which indicated that the declared place of business did not support the petitioner's claimed business existence, and no effective response was made to the show cause notice or before the appellate authority. The documents relied upon by the petitioner, including the leave and licence agreement and electricity bills, did not conclusively displace the finding that the declared business premises and lawful occupancy were unsubstantiated. In the absence of proof of licence fee payment, electricity charges, or any challenge to the field inspection findings, the decision of the Proper Officer was found to rest on material having evidentiary support and not to be perverse.

Conclusion: The challenge to the cancellation of registration failed and the writ petition was dismissed.

---