TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 534
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4/The Assistant Commissioner, CGST & CX, Begusarai Division on the ground that the business firm of the petitioner has been found as 'fake and non-existing firm' at the address mentioned in the registration certificate in most arbitrary manner violating the Principles of Natural Justice. ii. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside the order of Rejection of Revocation of Cancellation dated 30.04.2024 issued under the signature of Respondent No. 4/The Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Saharsa on the ground that during physical verification of the firm's address mentioned in the registration certificate the firm was non-existing and also neither any clarification was given nor any document in connection with the address was submitted by the petitioner in the reply to the query raised in the portal. iii. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus directing and commanding the responsible authorities for not taking any steps in furtherance of the Demand cum Show Cause Notice dated 02.08.2024 during the pendency of this writ application. iv. For any other reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ejected by Respondent No. 4 vide order dated 30.04.2024. A copy of the order dated 30.04.2024 has been enclosed as Annexure 'P/13' to the writ application. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the order dated 30.04.2024 (Annexure 'P/13'), the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & CX, Begusarai Division has issued a Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice under Section 127 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short 'CGST Act, 2017') read with Rule 142 1(a) of CGST/BGST Rules, 2017 by which he has proposed to impose a penalty equivalent to the amount of fake Input Tax Credit (in short 'ITC') availed to the tune of Rs. 2,31,03,615/- and fake ITC passed on to the tune of Rs. 2,11,18,336/-. 11. Learned counsel submits that on perusal of the order rejecting the application for revocation of cancellation, it would appear that the order refers to a physical verification said to have been conducted on 17.05.2023 and again on 22.03.2024 in which it was found that at the address mentioned in the registration certificate, the firm does not exist. The order takes into consideration a 'Panchnama' drawn in presence of the Mukhiya and the 'Sarpanch' of the said villag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een rightly cancelled in terms of Section 29 (2)(e) of the CGST Act, 2017 with retrospective effect. It is submitted that so far as Annexure 'P/8' to the writ application is concerned, as per records available in the office, no records regarding receipt of documents is available. It is submitted that the firm in question was found non-existent at the principal place of business, Tiri, Sour Bazar, Saharsa. The petitioner had not filed any amendment pertaining to change in principal place of business on the GSTIN portal. It is submitted that two letters dated 30.05.2023 and 05.06.2023 which were sent to the petitioner for submission of documents were returned undelivered by the postal authorities. 16. Learned Senior Standing Counsel has justified the order (Annexure 'P/13') by which the application of the petitioner for revocation has been rejected. Consideration 17. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records. Challenge in this writ application is to Annexure 'P/13' which is the order of rejection of application for revocation of cancellation. The order is contained in one paragraph which we reproduce hereunder for a ready reference:- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... A perusal of the same would show that the Proper Officer had some information in his possession based on which he issued notice to show cause for the reason "1. Section 29(2)(e)-registration obtained by means of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts." The petitioner was not only called upon to submit a reply to the notice within seven working days but was also given an opportunity to appear on 25.05.2023. It, however, appears that the date was extended for filing reply. The letters dated 29/30.05.2023 and 05.06.2023 which are said to have been issued by the Proper Officer are said to have been returned unserved, however, there is no denial of the receipt of letter dated 12.06.2023 (Annexure 'P/6') submitted by the petitioner in the office of the Superintendent, Central GST & CX. 20. Similarly, there is no denial of the receipt of Letter dated 12.06.2023 (Annexure 'P/7') whereby the petitioner had made available his Advocate's E-mail ID and the E-mail ID of the firm for further communication and information. Although receipt of the letter dated 20.06.2023 (Annexure 'P/8') has been denied by the respondents in paragraph '9' of their counter affidavit, this Court fin....