2026 (1) TMI 1394 - HC - GST

GST registration suspension and service via chartered accountant email: petitioner blamed CA but court dismisses petition and denies relief

Challenge to an ex parte order arising from GST registration suspension and alleged non-service of show cause notice due to notices sent to the ... Quashing of ex-parte order - service of show cause notice - notices not communicated due to use of the Chartered Accountant's e-mail - Provisional attachment - opportunity of fresh hearing - equitable discretionary relief - failure to appear - reliance on agent's lapse - GST proceedings - HELD THAT:- . ​​​​​​​The petitioner’s GST registration was suspended was a fact within his knowledge. The fact that the petitioner, for the purpose of GST registration, has provided the e-mail address of his Chartered Accountant was also a fact within his notice. The petitioner seeks to attribute the entire lapse to his Chartered Accountant for not communicating with him on the issue of show cause notice, which led to consequently passing the impugned order. When confronted, we are unable to get satisfactory explanation as to whether any action was initiated by the petitioner against his Chartered Accountant, because of whose fault the petitioner has suffered the order impugned. It is very easy to blame a professional, like the one in the present case, as such professional is not before this Court to defend his interest. Even otherwise, from the record we are unable to satisfy ourselves as to the ground raised by the petitioner is sufficient enough to infer that there was a default on the part of the Chartered Accountant and the petitioner was required to suffer for the same. Even if the petitioner is willing to deposit 50% of the liability, that by itself will not call upon us to deviate from the statutory procedure established by law. Thus, we are not inclined to show indulgence by entertaining the present petitions - petition lack merit, stand dismissed. Issues: Whether the petition seeking quashing of ex-parte orders passed under Section 73 of the DGST Act and revocation of provisional attachment, on the ground that notices were not communicated due to use of the Chartered Accountant's e-mail, should be allowed and a fresh hearing granted (with the petitioner offering to deposit 50% of the demand).Analysis: The factual matrix shows GST registration suspension and the provision of the Chartered Accountant's e-mail address on the registration portal were within the petitioner's knowledge. The petitioner did not file replies nor attend personal hearings, resulting in ex-parte orders under Section 73 of the DGST Act. The claim that the Chartered Accountant failed to communicate the show cause notices was not supported by satisfactory evidence of any action against the professional or demonstrable default that would justify equitable interference. Reliance on a prior decision involving different facts does not warrant deviation from the statutory procedure here. An offer to deposit 50% of the liability, without adequate justification for non-compliance with procedural requirements and absence of proof of the asserted representative's failure, is insufficient to invoke equitable relief and bypass statutory compliance.Conclusion: The petition to quash the ex-parte orders, revoke provisional attachments and grant a fresh hearing (even subject to deposit of 50% of the demand) is rejected; the petitions lack merit and are dismissed.