TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 669
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... partners, Mr. Hemant Arora has already passed away. 4. The Petitioner closed its business in June 2021. However, on 2nd February 2022, the Petitioner was served with a Show Cause Notice (hereinafter, 'SCN') for cancellation of the GST registration on the ground of non-filing of returns. In the said SCN, there was no ground set out that the proposed cancellation would be made retrospective. However, vide the impugned order dated 17th March 2022, the GST registration cancellation of the Petitioner was directed w.e.f. 29th September 2018. 5. The submission of ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is that the SCN did not propose retrospective cancellation and hence, the impugned order is unsustainable. Further, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that since the business of the Petitioner is closed, the Petitioner does not wish to revive the GST registration. Accordingly, he prays that cancellation be directed from the date of issuance of the SCN i.e., 2nd February 2022. 6. Ld. Counsel for the Respondents submits that the petition is highly belated, considering that the impugned order was passed way back on 17th March 2022. 7. Considering the circumstances that one partner of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner's GST registration forthwith." 9. The relevant part of the judgment in "M/s Balaji Industries (Vipin Kumar) (Supra) is as under: "8. It is apparent from the above that the reasons as set out in the impugned order were not the reasons as set out in the SCN. Further, the SCN also did not propose cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration with retrospective effect from 11.09.2017. 9. The petitioner filed an appeal against the impugned order cancelling its registration. However, the same was rejected by the appellate authority by the order dated 14.05.2024 on the ground that the petitioner's appeal was barred by limitation. 10. As noted above, the reason for which the petitioner's GST registration was cancelled was not reflected in the SCN. Although, the petitioner claims that it did not receive the SCN, it is apparent that even if it had, the same provided it no opportunity to respond to the reasons as set out in the impugned order cancelling its GST registration. 11. As noted above, the petitioner is not aggrieved by the cancellation of its GST registration as it had closed down its business. The petitioner is, essentially, ag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. The Court in Ramesh Chander taking note of the contours of Section 29 had held:- "1-5..... 6. Neither the show cause notice, nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation. In fact, in our view, order dated 13.07.2022 does not qualify as an order of cancellation of registration. 7-8...... 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. Merely, because a taxpayer has not filed the returns for some period does not mean that the taxpayer's registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when the returns were filed and the taxpayer was compliant. 10. It is important to note that, according to the respondent, one of the conseq....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s for retrospective cancellation. In fact, in our view, order dated 15.12.2021 does not qualify as an order of cancellation of registration. On one hand, it states that the registration is liable to be cancelled and on the other, in the column at the bottom there are no dues stated to be due against the petitioner and the table shows nil demand. 7. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the said order reflected that the GST registration of petitioner stands cancelled from 01.07.2017 even though returns thereafter have been filed by the Petitioner. 8. He further submits that the petitioner is no longer interested in continuing the business and the business has been discontinued. 9. In terms of Section 29(2) of the Act, 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. 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. Merely, b....