TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1143
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Late Sh. Jagjeet Singh Kapoor had filed returns of the proprietary concern until 30th June 2020. 5. However, a Show Cause Notice dated 1st December, 2021 (hereinafter 'SCN') was issued to the Petitioner as to why the GST registration ought not to be cancelled. The ground for cancellation stated in the SCN was that the returns were not furnished on behalf of the proprietary concern for a continuous period of six months. 6. It is stated on behalf of the Petitioner that after the death of the sole proprietor, no business was conducted by the Petitioner. The SCN was also not, therefore, served upon the Petitioner and the impugned order for cancellation was passed retrospectively w.e.f. 30st January, 2018. 7. The challenge in this petition is that since the business of the proprietary concern was discontinued w.e.f. 30th June, 2020, the retrospective cancellation could not have been effected, given that the returns were filed till 30th June, 2020. 8. Accordingly, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the cancellation of the registration should be given effect from 01st July, 2020 only and ought not be given effect for the period when the returns etc, were duly filed. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been determined as payable by the petitioner. The Central Tax, State Tax, Integrated Tax and Cess payable by the petitioner is reflected as, "0.0". 12. Apart from the above, the impugned order has also been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. Although the SCN called upon the petitioner to appear for a personal hearing at the appointed date and time, no such date or time was indicated. Thus, in effect the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to be heard. 13. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order. The respondents are directed to restore the petitioner's GST registration forthwith." 17. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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:- "1-5..... 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the registration is liable to be cancelled for the following reason "whereas no reply to the show cause notice has been submitted". However, the said order in itself is contradictory. The order states "reference to your reply dated 15.12.2021 in response to the notice to show cause dated 04.09.2021" and the reason stated for the cancellation is "whereas no reply to notice show cause has been submitted". The order further states that effective date of cancellation of registration is 01.07.2017 i.e., a retrospective date. 6. Neither the show cause notice, nor the order spell out the reasons 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 furt....