TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 1201
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eel namely M/s Omkar Steel. It so happened that M/s Omkar Steel requested the aforementioned Consultant to move an application for cancellation of their GST registration. However, due to an inadvertence on the part of the aforesaid Consultant, the request for cancellation of registration was made in the name of the petitioner instead of M/s Omkar Steel, whereas the petitioner had never instructed the Consultant to make any such application. The Consultant had forwarded the application for cancellation of registration on 15th October and on the very next date i.e. on 16th of October, 2018 itself, the cancellation application of the petitioner was accepted. Thereafter, the petitioner as well as their Consultant had approached the Department apprising them the inadvertent error that had cropped up on their part and the fact that the petitioner had never sought for cancellation of the registration and that the cancellation in fact was sought by another establishment namely Omkar Steel. In spite of the best efforts, the respondents refused to accept the contention of the petitioner and also refused to revoke the cancellation of registration. This has led to the filing of the present wri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orth on either side and on perusal of the record, the admitted factual position is that the petitioner was a duly registered body under the GST law. On account of inadvertence on the part of the Consultant of the petitioner, the application for cancellation of registration was put up by the Consultant in the name of the petitioner whereas the said application was in fact intended on behalf of another establishment namely M/s Omkar Steel. Thereafter, the petitioner had approached the respondents for revocation of the cancellation of registration which for want of proper provisions under the Act as also under the Rules has not been acceded or accepted by the Department. For ready reference, the provisions of Sections 29 and 30 of the GST Act are being reproduced hereinunder: "29. Cancellation (or suspension) of registration - (1) The proper officer may, either on his own motion or on an application filed by the registered person or by his legal heirs, in case of death of such person, cancel the registration, in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed, having regard to the circumstances where,-- (a) the business has been discontinued, transferred fully for any reas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lectronic cash ledger, equivalent to the credit of input tax in respect of inputs held in stock and inputs contained in semi-finished or finished goods held in stock or capital goods or plant and machinery on the day immediately preceding the date of such cancellation or the output tax payable on such goods, whichever is higher, calculated in such manner as may be prescribed: Provided that in case of capital goods or plant and machinery, the taxable person shall pay an amount equal to the input tax credit taken on the said capital goods or plant and machinery, reduced by such percentage points as may be prescribed or the tax on the transaction value of such capital goods or plant and machinery under section 15, whichever is higher. (6) The amount payable under sub-section (5) shall be calculated in such manner as may be prescribed. 30. Revocation of Cancellation of registration - (1) Subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, any registered person, whose registration is cancelled by the proper officer on his own motion, may apply to such officer for revocation of cancellation of the registration in the prescribed manner within thirty days from the date of service of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 30 of the GST Act, there is a deliberate exclusion of a particular category, of those persons whose cancellation has been done at their request and such an exclusion does not finds place in Rule 22. 11.Another fact worth mentioning at this juncture is that M/s Omkar Steel who had in fact made the request for cancellation of registration but on account of the error on the part of the Consultant the application in the name of the petitioner was put up. The said Omkar Steel had subsequently moved an application making a request for cancellation of their registration and on their application, the Department had issued a notice under Rule 22(1) of the GST Rules. The petitioner has by way of a covering memo brought on record an order issued in this regard in favour of M/s Omkar Steel to establish that a notice to M/s Omkar Steel was issued before ordering for cancellation of their registration. 12. True it is that Section 30 of the Central GST Act speaks revocation of cancellation of registration of only those registered persons whose registration is cancelled by the proper officer on his own motion which means that in respect of the other category which is envisaged under Section 2....