2025 (10) TMI 670

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act, 2017"] with the 1st respondent. A show-cause notice, dated 23.08.2024, was issued by the 1st respondent proposing to cancel the registration of the petitioner under the CGST Act, on the ground that the petitioner was not conducted the business from the declared place of business and that invoices and bills were being issued without supply of goods or services. 2. The petitioner contends the following:- The declared place of the business of the petitioner, under the registration application, was D.No.21-582, Munireddy Colony, Jammalamadugu, Kadapa District. It appears that this premises was inspected and a panchanama was conducted, on 23.08.2024, after which the aforesaid notice had been issued. The petitioner after receipt of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and 01.08.2024 respectively. 4. It is further stated, in the counter affidavit, that the landlord of the original office in Jammalamadugu, YSR Kadapa, had been contacted regarding the occupation of the premises, by the petitioner. The said landlord informed the respondent that the petitioner had executed a rental agreement but had not occupied the house and subsequently requested to cancel the agreement. It also appears that the property had been transferred to another person who specifically stated that he had no knowledge of the petitioner or the deponent of the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition. 5. The 1st respondent had specifically stated that these facts make it clear that the petitioner had never conducted any bu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssions. She submits that in such circumstances the opportunity of personal hearing required under Section-29 of the CGST Act, had been given. 8. The petitioner while contending that he was unable to furnish the details of change of address, has not produced any material before us to demonstrate that any attempt was made since October-2023, to inform the authorities about the change of address. Further, the contention of the petitioner that such change of address could not be intimated on account the pending assessment proceedings also cannot be accepted inasmuch as the petitioner was required, under law, to intimate the change of address within 15 days from the date of change, whereas the petitioner, despite shifting office in October-20....