2024 (1) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes for the respondents and perused the record. 2. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed for the following relief: "pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 4threspondent in issuing impugned proceedings Ref No ZA3707230111770, dt: 07.07.2023, cancelling petitioners GST registration No. 37A1AP15009B1ZW and further order issued by the 5th respondent rejecting application for revocation of cancellation vide impugned proceedings Ref.No. ZA3710230041449 dt: 04.10.2023 by declaring them as illegal arbitrary and violative ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the communication could not be made. It is further submitted that there are photographs to show that the business is being run at the registered address. 8. The application for revocation has been rejected by an order dated 04.10.2023, after examining the petitioner's reply on the ground that according to the field visit report there was no business running in the mentioned registered address. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is running business at the registered address but the petitioner's reply was not considered in proper perspective. 10. Objection is raised by learned Government Pleader for the respondents that the petitioner has got the statutory remedy to file appeal under the Goods and Serv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: "I accept that there was a procedure mistake on the part of me for not update the changing of my basic structure. If I found so I will take the responsibility of paying all the GST dues without fail." 14. The question if the petitioner was carrying on his business at the registered address or not at the relevant point of time, is a question of fact. The finding recorded in the order of cancellation of GST registration and in the order rejecting the application for revocation, that the petitioner was not running business at the registered address is a finding of fact, which prima facie is based on some material in the form of the field inspection report. 15. If the petitioner's case is contrary, that the business was being r....