2025 (3) TMI 767 - HC - GST

GST registration cancellation cannot be made retrospective without proper reasons and prior notice in Show Cause Notice

Sharda Papers Versus Commissioner OF CGST Delhi West And Anr.

Delhi HC allowed writ petition challenging retrospective cancellation of GST registration effective from 07 February 2019. Court held that the original ... Cancellation of Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration with retrospective effect from 07 February 2019 - absence of reasons in the original SCN - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It becomes apparent that absence of reasons in the original SCN in support of a proposed retrospective cancellation as well as a failure to place the petitioner on prior notice of such an intent clearly invalidates the impugned action. It is opined that the writ petition is entitled to succeed on this short ground alone. The writ petition is allowed by modifying the impugned order and providing that the cancellation of the petitioner’s GST registration shall come into effect from the date of the SCN i.e. 12 February 2024 - The stipulation in the impugned order of cancellation to come into effect from 07 February 2019 is consequently quashed. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal issues considered in this judgment revolve around the validity of the retrospective cancellation of a Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration. Specifically, the issues include:Whether the retrospective cancellation of GST registration from a date prior to the issuance of the Show Cause Notice (SCN) is valid under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the Act).Whether the absence of reasons in the SCN and subsequent cancellation order invalidates the retrospective cancellation.Whether the failure to provide prior notice of the intent to cancel registration retrospectively affects the validity of the cancellation order.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISRelevant legal framework and precedents:The legal framework is primarily governed by Section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This section allows the proper officer to cancel the GST registration of a person from a date deemed fit, including a retrospective date, provided the circumstances set out in the subsection are satisfied.The Court referred to precedents such as Riddhi Siddhi Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax (CGST), South Delhi & Anr., Ramesh Chander vs Assistant Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax, Dwarka Division, CGST Delhi & Anr., and Delhi Polymers vs Commissioner, Trade and Taxes & Anr. These cases emphasized that the power to cancel registration retrospectively should not be applied mechanically or routinely and must be based on objective criteria with clear reasoning.Court's interpretation and reasoning:The Court emphasized that the power to cancel GST registration retrospectively is not absolute and must be exercised with due application of mind and clear reasoning. The mere existence of the power does not justify its invocation without a detailed rationale. The Court highlighted that retroactive cancellations have significant consequences, such as denying input tax credits to the taxpayer's customers, which necessitates a well-reasoned order.Key evidence and findings:The Court found that the SCN dated 12 February 2024 did not disclose any intent to cancel the GST registration retrospectively from 07 February 2019. Furthermore, the cancellation order lacked any reasoning or justification for the retrospective date, which the Court found to be a critical deficiency.Application of law to facts:Applying Section 29 of the Act, the Court held that the failure to provide reasons or prior notice of the intent to cancel registration retrospectively invalidated the cancellation order. The Court noted that the absence of reasons in both the SCN and the cancellation order demonstrated a lack of due application of mind, rendering the retrospective cancellation unsustainable.Treatment of competing arguments:The respondent's argument that the retrospective cancellation was justified was not supported by any substantive reasoning in the SCN or the cancellation order. The Court found that the lack of reasoning and failure to notify the petitioner of the retrospective intent were fatal to the respondent's position.Conclusions:The Court concluded that the writ petition was entitled to succeed due to the absence of reasons in the SCN and the failure to notify the petitioner of the retrospective cancellation intent. The impugned order was modified to reflect that the cancellation would take effect from the date of the SCN, 12 February 2024, rather than the retrospective date of 07 February 2019.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Court held that:The power to cancel GST registration retrospectively must be exercised with clear reasoning and cannot be applied mechanically.The absence of reasons in the SCN and the cancellation order invalidates the retrospective cancellation.The failure to provide prior notice of the intent to cancel registration retrospectively is a critical deficiency that invalidates the cancellation order.The cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration shall come into effect from the date of the SCN, 12 February 2024, and the retrospective cancellation from 07 February 2019 is quashed.The Court's decision underscores the importance of providing clear reasons and prior notice when exercising the power to cancel GST registration retrospectively, ensuring that such actions are not arbitrary and are subject to judicial scrutiny.