2022 (8) TMI 689

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Via the aforesaid order, the appellate authority has revoked the order by which the petitioner's GST registration was cancelled. 2. We may note that the order, via which the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled, is dated 10.10.2021. The said order, in turn, is predicated on the show-cause notice (SCN) dated 28.09.2021 2.1. In the SCN, the proposal to cancel the petitioner's registration was premised on the following: "In case, Registration has been obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts." 2.2. Via the SCN, the petitioner was granted seven (7) working days to respond i.e., present its defence. Besides this, the SCN also indicated the date and time when its representative would ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nding taxes and filing of pending returns. The law also permits revocation of cancellation of registration on sufficient cause being shown; the cause shown by the Appellant is sufficient to allow revocation of cancellation of registration. 5.4.1 Further, I also refer to the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, New Delhi Circular No. 99/18/2019-GST, dated 23-4-2019, wherein at Para 3 of said circular it has been clarified that: "3. First proviso to sub-rule (1) of rule 23 of the said Rules provides that if the registration has been cancelled on account of failure of the registered person to furnish returns, no application for revocation of cancellation of registration shall be filed, unless such returns are furnished ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... i.e., on account of the OIA dated 07.01.2022 not being complied with (as alluded to hereinabove), that the petitioner has approached this Court. 4. In the first instance, the matter was listed before the Court on 27.05.2022, when we had, after capturing the grievance of the petitioner, issued notice in the matter. 4.1. On that date, Mr Akash Vajpai, had accepted notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue. Accordingly, Mr Vajpai was directed to return with instructions, as to why OIA dated 07.01.2022, had not been given effect to. 4.2. Thereafter, the matter was listed in Court on 02.06.2022. On the said date, Mr Vajpai had indicated to us that a decision had been taken by the respondents/revenue to prefer an appeal against the OI....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the inspection of the petitioner's premises (and the finding that the petitioner was not in existence at the said premises) was the prime reason, based on which the respondents/revenue proceeded, it appears, to cancel the petitioner's registration; although, the said reason does not find mention in the order dated 10.10.2021. 5.4. This reason, according to Mr Sachdev, is embedded in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents/revenue. Mr Sachdev, thus, emphasizes that the counter-affidavit cannot improve upon the order dated 10.10.2021. 6. We are in agreement with the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner. The order dated 10.10.2021 does not advert the aforesaid reason, which now finds a place in the counter....