TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1659
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by invoking the provisions of Section 29(2)(e) of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017 (in short 'said Act of 2017'). 2. The facts of the case in brief are that a notice to show cause dated March 14, 2024 was issued to the petitioner calling upon it to explain as to why its registration should not be cancelled. The petitioner replied thereto but despite such reply, the CGST authorities did not conclude the proceedings. 3. Feeling aggrieved thereby and assailing the said notice to show-cause, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition being WPA 26343 of 2024. The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated October 29, 2024 thereby directing the respondent authorities "to dispose of the matter in accordance wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....larities being there in the notice to show-cause, the petitioner replied to the same. It is submitted that despite such reply, the proceeding was not concluded by the CGST Authorities for which the petitioner had to approach this Court by filing the earlier writ petition and then in contempt proceeding. 10. Inviting the attention of this Court to the hearing notice dated November 22, 2024 (Annexure-'P10' at page 88 of the writ petition), it is submitted by Mr. Bhaumik that the said notice was given to the petitioner by the Assistant Commissioner, Burrabazar Division, CGST & CX, Kolkata North Commissionerate in compliance with the order passed in WPA 26343 of 2024 however despite direction of this Court on the said authority to conclude t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... will no longer be sustainable as the same will be deemed to have answered against the petitioner in view of the principles of constructive res judicata. 15. Insofar as the challenge thrown to the order impugned i.e. the order dated December 9, 2024, is concerned, the same deserves to be allowed. The order dated December 9, 2024 cannot withstand scrutiny of this Court. Although the order records that the petitioner had used a reply to the notice to show-cause but the order has not dealt with the reply at all. The order does not disclose any application of mind to the matter. 16. The opening portion of the one page order refers to the issuance of the notice to show-cause and an opportunity given to the petitioner to file a reply to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt for cases like the one at hand where a final order has been passed without any application of mind and without recording any reason. It is well settled that post-decisional hearing does not sub-serve the rules of natural justice and therefore the submission of Mr. Banerjee is not accepted. 20. For all the reasons aforesaid, the order dated December 9, 2024, impugned in the writ petition, is set aside. The adjudicating authority shall hear the petitioner once again, consider the reply to the show-cause that has been filed by the petitioner earlier and then pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 21. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and all points are left open to be decided by the adjudicat....