2026 (5) TMI 1809

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r-2, Bhadohi, whereby the petitioners' registration under the U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been cancelled. 3. Submission is, arising from search conducted by the D.G.G.I. under the C.G.S.T. Act, 2017, certain facts may have become known to the State tax authorities, as well. Notice was issued to the petitioners under Section 61 of the Act on 23.09.2025. Petitioners are participating in that proceeding. However, it has yet not been concluded. Neither any notice of adjudication has been issued nor any other adverse interference has been drawn in those proceedings. 4. During pendency of the proceedings under Section 61 of the Act, further show cause notice has been issued to the petitioners ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot be tested. Those fact issues may be dealt with and decided on the strength of evidence. To the extent, Rule 21(b) of the Rules may allow for cancellation of registration on an allegation of fake supplies, found proven, we may not seek to pre-judge the issue. Any decision by this Court, on that ground, would have a binding effect on the proceedings for confirmation of demand, if any. 8. Then, it is equally true that the allegation of fake supplies may give rise to both proceedings for cancellation of registration and also for confirmation of demand for reason of ITC being reversed. Besides recognising the above, we do not propose to make any observation as may have any adverse effect on the proceedings that may arise. At present, we re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rge liability towards output tax in excess of 99% of the tax liability. In that light, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh took note that the violation alleged may not be serious enough to warrant cancellation, that too during pendency of investigation. It is in that light, the observations were made in paragraph nos. 31 and 32 of the report, as has been relied by learned counsel for the petitioners. For ready reference, the same reads as below: "31 How a "prima facie" investigation could be the basis of an order of cancellation of GST Registration without the investigation being completed, is not explained by the counsel for the respondents. In our opinion, the respondents ought to have waited for the investigation to be completed ....