Retrospective GST registration cancellation set aside; fresh inspection ordered under GST rules for restoration decision

The HC set aside the retrospective cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration due to non-submission of requisite documents and lack of natural justice. The court directed a fresh inspection at the petitioner's new premises, with the concerned authorities to decide on the restoration of GST registration within one month of inspection. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

---

---

ISSUES:

Whether cancellation of GST registration with retrospective effect is valid in absence of proper verification of business premises.Whether failure to file application for amendment of registered address before shifting premises violates provisions of the CGST Act, 2017.Whether restoration of GST registration can be granted based on submission of new rent agreement and supporting documents after cancellation.Whether a fresh inspection is warranted to verify existence of business at new premises for restoration of GST registration.

RULINGS / HOLDINGS:

The cancellation of GST registration with retrospective effect was upheld due to non-compliance with procedural requirements, including failure to file application for amendment of address as per Section 28 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 19.The mere submission of facts without evidencing the same or complying with provisions of the CGST Act/Rules, 2017 "cannot be considered at face value."Restoration of GST registration is contingent upon verification of the new premises and submission of requisite documents, including complete rent agreement, Aadhaar and PAN cards of witnesses, ownership proof, NOC from owner, and geotagged photographs.A direction for a fresh inspection of the new premises is appropriate, and a decision on restoration shall be taken within one month of such inspection.

RATIONALE:

The Court applied the statutory framework under Section 28 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Rule 19 thereof, which mandates filing of an application for amendment of registered particulars prior to shifting business premises.The Appellate Authority's reliance on lack of complete documentation, including incomplete rent agreement and absence of verification documents, was affirmed as valid grounds for dismissal of restoration appeal.The Court emphasized that compliance with procedural safeguards and documentary evidence is essential to establish existence at the declared business address and to prevent misuse of GST registration.No dissent or doctrinal shift was indicated; the judgment reinforces the importance of procedural compliance and evidentiary verification in GST registration matters.

---