TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 258
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te. Insp. Neeraj Kumar, PS Shahdra, M-8010126421. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present four petitions have been filed by the Petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the following Show Cause Notices (hereinafter, 'SCNs') and orders for cancellation of GST registration: (i) W.P. (C) 685/2025- Show Cause Notice dated 7th November, 2024 issued by Keshari Nandan Shrivastwa, Superintendent, Range-137, CGST, East Delhi, as also the consequent order for cancellation of GST registration dated 23rd November 2024. (ii) W.P. (C) 1314/2025- Show Cause Notice dated 16th October, 2024 issued by Ajay Kumar, Superintendent, Range-136, CGST, East Delhi, as also the consequent order for cancellation of GST registration dated 29th October 2024. (iii) W.P. (C) 2461/2025- Show Cause Notice dated 27th September, 2024 issued by Ajay Kumar, Superintendent, Range-136, CGST, East Delhi, as also the consequent order for cancellation of GST registration dated 22nd October 2024. (iv) W.P. (C) 2867/2025- Show Cause Notice dated 6th February, 2025 issued by Ranjeet Kumar Sharma, Superintendent, Range-142....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asoned and demonstrative of due application of mind. It is also necessary to observe that the mere existence of such a power would not in itself be sufficient to sustain its invocation. What we seek to emphasise is that the power to cancel retrospectively can neither be robotic nor routinely applied unless circumstances so warrant. When tested on the aforesaid precepts it becomes ex facie evident that the impugned order of cancellation cannot be sustained. 6. We note that while dealing with the right of the respondents to cancel GST registration with retrospective effect and the manner in which such power should be exercised in accordance with the statutory scheme was an issue which was noticed in Ramesh Chander vs Assistant Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax, Dwarka Division, CGST Delhi & Anr. The Court in Ramesh Chander taking note of the contours of Section 29 had held:- "1. The petitioner impugns order in appeal dated 29.12.2023, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed solely on the ground of limitation. Petitioner had filed the appeal impugning order dated 13.07.2022 whereby the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled retrospectively with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not qualify as an order of cancellation of registration. 7. As per the petitioner, the said order reflected that the GST of the Petitioner stands cancelled from 0 1.07.2017 even though returns thereafter have been filed by the Petitioner. 8. We notice that the show cause notice as well as the impugned order of cancellation. are themselves vitiated on account of lack of reason and clarity. The appeal has been dismissed solely on the ground of limitation. Since the very foundation of entire proceedings i.e. show cause notice and the order of cancellation are vitiated. we are of the view that no purpose would be served in relegating the petitioner to the stage of an appeal. 9. In terms of Section 29 (2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the proper officer may cancel the GST registration of a person from such date including any retrospective date, as he may deem fit if the circumstances set out in the said sub-section are satisfied. The registration cannot be cancelled with retrospective effect mechanically. It can be cancelled only if the proper officer deems it fit to do so. Such satisfaction cannot be subjective but must be based on some objective criteria. Me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner, Trade and Taxes & Anr. wherein the following was observed:- "1. Petitioner has filed the appeal impugning order of cancellation of registration dated 15.12.2021 whereby the OST registration of the Petitioner has been cancelled retrospectively with effect from 01.07.2017. Petitioner also impugns Show Cause Notice dated 04.09.2021. 2. Vide Show Cause Notice dated 04.09.2021, petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why the registration be not cancelled for the following reason:- "Collects any amount representing the tax but fails to pay the same to the account of the Central/State Government beyond a period of three months from the date on which such payment becomes due" 3. Petitioner was engaged in the business of Sanitary ware Products & Accessories i.e., Baths, Shower, Washbasins, Seats and Cover etc. and possessed OST registration. 4. Show Cause Notice dated 04.09.2021 was issued to the Petitioner seeking to cancel its registration. However, the Show Cause Notice also does not put the petitioner to notice that the registration is liable to be cancelled retrospectively. Accordingly, the petitioner had no opportunity to even object to the retrospective cancell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r's customers are denied the input tax credit availed in respect of the supplies made by the tax payer during such period. Although. we do not consider it apposite to examine this aspect but assuming that the respondent's contention in required to consider this aspect while passing any order for cancellation of GST registration with retrospective effect. Thus. a taxpayer's registration can be cancelled with retrospective effect only where such consequences are intended and are warranted. 11. It may be further noted that both the Petitioners and the department want cancellation of the GST registration of the Petitioner, though for a different reason. 12. In view of the fact that Petitioner does not seek to carry on business or continue the registration, the impugned order dated 15.12.2021 is modified to the limited extent that registration shall now be treated as cancelled with effect from 04.09.2021 i.e., the date when the Show Cause Notice was issued. 13. It is clarified that Respondents are also not precluded from taking any steps for recovery of any tax, penalty or interest that may be due in respect of the subject firm in accordance with law. 14. Petition is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7/2025 titled M/s Compact Enterprises v. Principal Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax East Delhi. xxxx 12. Under these circumstances, the following directions are issued: i. The final order dated 27th February, 2025 passed by the Court in this writ petition shall stands recalled and any order giving effect to the said order of this Court shall also not be given effect to. ii. The proprietor of the Petitioner Concern, Mr. Sahib Alam shall remain present in Court on the next date of hearing. iii. The Registry shall list all the three writ petitions mentioned above, along with the present writ petition, before this Court on the next date. iv. Intimation shall be given by Mr. Jain, ld. Counsel to the Petitioners in those three cases as well so that they can remain present before this Court." 8. Thereafter, all the four writ petitions had been taken up together on 29th April, 2025, wherein ld. Counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. Pranay Jain, had submitted that he had sent notices to his clients i.e., the Petitioners. However, the Petitioners have not contacted him since the filing of the review petition by the Department. Ld. Counsel had further submitted that he is no l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sued: i. The order passed by this Court disposing of the subject petition dated 6th March, 2025 is recalled. ii. Non-bailable warrants are issued for production of the Petitioner- Mr. Aman who has deposed the affidavit dated 4th March, 2025 in the subject petition filed before the Court. iii. The non-bailable warrant shall be executed by the SHO of the concerned area. iv. The non-bailable warrant shall be executed through Mr. Sanjay Lao, ld. Standing Counsel (Criminal) for the Government of NCT of Delhi. v. The Petitioner shall be produced before the Court on the next date of hearing." 9. On the next date i.e. 20th May 2025, all the four petitions were taken up together. On the said date, this Court received the reports as directed in the previous orders. The reports were received from the following authorities: i. In W.P.(C) 685/2025, Head Constable Mr. Sachin Kumar, PS Karawal Nagar, reported that Mr. Satyapal is not traceable and his mobile number i.e. 9625164590 is switched off. ii. In W.P.(C) 1314/2025, the report had been received from Inspector Vipin Yadav from S.H.O., PS Karawal Nagar that Mr. Rajan is not traceable at the address given in the writ petition a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll also verify if any other SCNs have been issued to these Petitioners for any of the financial years. A report in this regard shall also be placed by the next date of hearing." 11. Since the Aadhaar card copies were given by the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, notice was issued to the UIDAI to place on record the details available with the UIDAI in respect of the said Aadhaar cards, as it clearly appeared that something was amiss. 12. The matter was then taken up on 28th May 2025. Except one person-Mr. Aman, no one else was traceable. Inspector Neeraj Kumar, PS Shahdara, Delhi had appeared before the Court and placed on record a status report along with several documents. According to the said report, the Aadhaar Card bearing no. 453910321889 is in the name of one Mr. Aman, who works as a domestic help and resides in the quarters attached to the official quarters of an official of the Indian Air Force. The Court noticed that the photograph of this individual does not match with the photograph in the Aadhaar Card handed over by Mr. Pranay Jain, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner. 13. In the said report, it was also stated that the firm-M/s Compact Enterprises has a bank account with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....galities in this matter, the details supplied by the UIDAI of all the four persons including their addresses and mobile numbers are handed over to the Id. Counsels appearing for the Department i.e. Mr. Panwar and Mr. Singla as also to Mr. Sanjay Lao, Id. Standing Counsel (Criminal), GNCTD. 17. Let further enquiries be made about these individuals on the basis of their addresses and mobile numbers and whatever details can be gathered be presented to the Court tomorrow i.e., 29th May, 2025 at 2:30 p.m." 18. Today, Mr. Sahib Alam has been produced in the Court. He is the proprietor of the M/s Royal Enterprises. He states that he came in touch with one Mr. Rajat, who is a scrap dealer in Ghaziabad, Loha Mandi. Mr. Rajat offered him a job for managing entry and exit of vehicles. Under the pretext of giving Mr. Alam employment, his Adhaar Card and Pan Card were taken by Mr. Rajat. He was also made to open a bank account in Jammu and Kashmir Bank, however, the details of the same are not known to him. Although, after Mr. Alam had given his PAN Card and Adhaar Card to Mr. Rajat, no employment was offered by him to Mr. Alam. 19. According to Mr. Alam, he has been cheated "by Mr. Rajat".....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Oath Commissioner or not as she could not recognize them even from their Aadhaar Card or photographs. v. The SCNs which were filed with the writ petitions were also forged and fabricated. 27. The four Petitioners i.e. M/s S R Enterprises, M/s Trix India Sales Corporation, M/s Royal Enterprises and M/s Compact Enterprises are stated to be run by the following people namely: S.No. Name Aadhaar Number Current Address Current Mobile No. 1. Mr. Satyapal 498091297686 S/o Shankar, R/o Plot No. 34, Gali No. 7, Sant Surdas Nagar, Sector-74, Mirzapur, Ballabgarh, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 9871573611 2. Mr. Rajan 985580468256 S/o Tribhuwan Prasad, R/o House No. 53 A, Block-F2, Hamdard Nagar, Hauz Khas, South Delhi, Delhi-110062. 9910883450 3. Mr. Sahib Alam 655605243580 C/o Mohd. Anwar, R/o Building No. 610, Gali No. 8, New Mustafabad Gokal Pur, Seelampur North East Delhi, Delhi-110094. 7302903835 4. Mr. Aman 453910321889 S/o Ashok, R/o H. No. 16, Air Force Station, Arjangarh Aya Nagar, South Delhi, Delhi-110047 9711569337 28. However, Mr. Sahib Alam, who is present in the Court today clearly does not even run M/s Royal Enterprises. He is in fact unemployed. 29. ....