<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (7) TMI 360 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794474</link>
    <description>Retrospective cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2) of the CGST Act is permitted where the statute authorises cancellation from any date, including a past date, and the second proviso allows suspension of registration during pending cancellation proceedings. The expression &quot;as may be prescribed&quot; was read as referring to the procedure prescribed under Section 29. On the facts noted, the show cause notice alleged fraud and gave an opportunity to reply and seek personal hearing, which was not utilised. The challenge to Section 29(2) and Rule 21(a) therefore disclosed no ground for writ interference, and the writ petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2026 08:26:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=910227" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 360 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794474</link>
      <description>Retrospective cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2) of the CGST Act is permitted where the statute authorises cancellation from any date, including a past date, and the second proviso allows suspension of registration during pending cancellation proceedings. The expression &quot;as may be prescribed&quot; was read as referring to the procedure prescribed under Section 29. On the facts noted, the show cause notice alleged fraud and gave an opportunity to reply and seek personal hearing, which was not utilised. The challenge to Section 29(2) and Rule 21(a) therefore disclosed no ground for writ interference, and the writ petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>