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>GST registration cancellation cannot be retrospective without proper notice and reasons under natural justice principles</h1> <h3>M/s Radha Rani Metal Versus Principal Commissioner Of Goods And Service Tax North Delhi</h3> Delhi HC allowed the writ petition challenging retrospective cancellation of GST registration. The court found that the original Show Cause Notice dated ... Retrospective cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration - absence of reasons in the original SCN - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It becomes pertinent to note that the proceedings had come to be initiated pursuant to a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 19 September 2024. That notice embodied no intent or disclosure of the respondents contemplating cancellation from a retrospective date. 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. WThe 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. 19 September 2024. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal questions considered in this judgment include: Whether the retrospective cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was valid under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). Whether the Show Cause Notice (SCN) and the subsequent order for cancellation of GST registration complied with the requirements of providing adequate reasons and notice to the petitioner. Whether the principles established in previous judgments regarding retrospective cancellation of GST registration were adhered to in this case.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISRelevant legal framework and precedents:The case revolves around Section 29 of the CGST Act, which empowers authorities to cancel GST registration from a retrospective date. The Court referenced previous judgments, including Riddhi Siddhi Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax and Ramesh Chander vs Assistant Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax, which emphasized the necessity for orders of cancellation to be reasoned and demonstrative of due application of mind.Court's interpretation and reasoning:The Court emphasized that the power to cancel GST registration retrospectively must not be applied mechanically or routinely. The order under Section 29(2) must reflect the reasons for such cancellation, especially considering the severe consequences of retroactive cancellation, such as affecting the taxpayer's customers' ability to claim input tax credit.Key evidence and findings:The Court noted that the SCN issued to the petitioner did not disclose any intention to cancel the registration retrospectively. Furthermore, the order of cancellation failed to provide adequate reasons justifying the retroactive effect.Application of law to facts:The Court applied the principles from previous judgments, highlighting that the absence of reasons in the SCN and the lack of prior notice of the retrospective intent rendered the cancellation invalid. The Court found that the authority's failure to provide rudimentary reasons for the retroactive cancellation was a critical flaw.Treatment of competing arguments:The Court considered the respondent's argument that the taxpayer's failure to file returns warranted cancellation. However, it concluded that such a failure does not automatically justify retrospective cancellation, especially without clear intent and reasoning in the SCN.Conclusions:The Court concluded that the writ petition should succeed due to the lack of reasons and notice in the SCN regarding retrospective cancellation. The impugned order was modified to ensure the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration would take effect from the date of the SCN, not retroactively.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Court preserved the following crucial legal reasoning: 'The power to cancel retrospectively can neither be robotic nor routinely applied unless circumstances so warrant.' 'The order under Section 29(2) must itself reflect the reasons which may have weighed upon the respondents to cancel registration with retrospective effect.'Core principles established: The necessity for detailed reasoning and prior notice in SCNs when contemplating retrospective cancellation of GST registration. The importance of objective criteria and demonstrable application of mind in exercising the power to cancel GST registration retrospectively.Final determinations on each issue: The retrospective cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was deemed invalid due to lack of adequate reasoning and notice. The cancellation was modified to be effective from the date of the SCN, ensuring compliance with the principles of fairness and transparency.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
