M/S Vivizen Contracting PVT LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The High Court, adopting a justice-oriented approach, found merit in the petitioner's assertion that their inability to reply to the show-cause notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause. Consequently, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order of cancellation and remit the matter back to the respondents to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel submitted that if the cancellation order was set aside, the petitioner would file pending returns and pay all outstanding taxes, interest, and penalties. The Court placed this submission on record. The Court quashed the impugned order dated 20.09.2024 passed by the Superintendent of Central Tax. The respondent was directed to reinstate the petitioner's GST registration within four weeks, subject to the petitioner filing GST returns and paying up-to-date tax, interest, and penalty within the same period. The Court explicitly stated that this order was made in the peculiar facts and circumstances and should not be treated as a precedent.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Vivizen Contracting Pvt Ltd., obtained GST registration on December 10, 2021. The respondents, including the Superintendent of Central Tax, issued a show-cause notice dated August 13, 2024, regarding the petitioner's GST registration. The petitioner claims this notice went unnoticed due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, leading to their inability to reply. Consequently, the Superintendent of Central Tax passed an order dated September 20, 2024, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration. The petitioner also challenged an order dated June 24, 2025, passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, rejecting their application for an extension of time to file an application for revocation of cancellation. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka seeking to set aside these orders and restore their GST registration.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration by the Superintendent of Central Tax, vide order dated 20.09.2024, is arbitrary, erroneous, and not sustainable in law, considering the petitioner's claim of bonafide reasons for not replying to the show-cause notice? 2. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application for an extension of period to file an application for revocation of cancellation of registration by the Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, vide order dated 24.06.2025, is arbitrary, erroneous, and not sustainable in law? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that their failure to reply to the show-cause notice was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause. They sought to set aside the cancellation order and restore their GST registration. They also challenged the rejection of their extension application. Respondents' Contention: The judgment records that learned counsel for the respondents appeared and argued the matter, but their specific contentions are not detailed in the provided text.