BharatTaxGST

M/S Sri Hanuman Enterprises vs. The Superintendent Of Central Tax

Original PDF →
WP/11545/2026HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01020702202605 May 2026Bench: R RAGHUNANDAN RAO,T.C.D.SEKHAR5 pages
For Petitioner: SHAIK JEELANI BASHAFor Respondent: B V S CHALAPATI RAO, SANTHI CHANDRA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010207022026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 11545/2026 Between: 1. M/S SRI HANUMAN ENTERPRISES, H.NO. 7-6-355/1, GROUND FLOOR, RIGHT SIDE RAILWAY GATE, SANJEEVAIAH NAGAR, REVENUE WARD 20, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - 522002. REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR.KUKKALA RAMU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, KOTHAPET EAST RANGE, GUNTUR RANGE, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 002. 2. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI - 110 001. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction declaring the action of the 1STRespondent in passing the Order for cancellation of Registration in Form GST REG-19, dated 07.01.2026, without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the 2 Petitioner, without following the due process of law, as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Central Goods and IF u Service Tax Act 2017, contrary to Article 14, 19(1 )(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and the same is in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Rule of Law and consequently set aside the Order for Cancellation of Registration in Form GST REG-19, dated 07.01.2026 passed by the 1STRespondent, as null and void and pass s IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased leased to suspend the operation of the Order for Cancellation of Registration in Form GST REG-19, dated 07.01.2026 and consequently direct the 1®* Respondent to Restore the Registration Certificate of the Petitioner forthwith, in the interest of Justice and equity, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, as otherwise, the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. B V S CHALAPATI RAO 2. SANTHI CHANDRA 3

The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)

The petitioner is the registered person. He has now approached this Court, by way of the present writ petition, in aggrieved by the order of cancellation of registration, dated 07.01.2026. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had been served with a show-cause notice, dated 28.10.2025 and sought time for replying to the same. However, respondent No.1 had passed an order of cancellation of registration, dated 07.01.2026 without such opportunity being given to the petitioner.

3.

The petitioner contends that there was violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the petitioner was not given an opportunity of making out his case on continuing business in the declared place of business.

4.

The learned Standing Counsel submits that the order of cancellation came to be passed as the petitioner had not answered the communication, dated 16.10.2025 as also the show-cause notice dated 28.10.2025 by producing the records showing that the petitioner had been conducting business from the declared place of business. Learned Standing Counsel would contend that in such circumstances, the cancellation of registration cannot be faulted.

5.

A perusal of the impugned order, dated 07.01.2026 would show that the respondent had cancelled the registration of the petitioner on the ground that there was no response from the petitioner to the communication, dated 16.10.2025 and the show-cause notice, dated 28.10.2025. Apart from this, the respondent also took the view that the petitioner was not carrying on the business at the declared place of business, inasmuch as a letter, dated

4

16.10.

2025, sent by registered post, was returned with the noting that there was no such person at the door number.

6.

A perusal of the order, dated 07.01.2026 would also show that the respondent having recorded the aforesaid grounds, had cancelled the registration with effect from 30.12.2024, while ostensibly giving time to the respondent for response. The cancellation of registration of the petitioner with effect from 30.12.2024, is a fait accompli which cannot be reversed by any material placed by the petitioner before the respondent. By virtue of this order, the opportunity of making out a case has been lost by the petitioner.

7.

In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order, dated 07.01.2026 and the matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to take a decision afresh, after considering the objections, if any, filed by the petitioner. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

________________

T.C.D.SEKHAR, J

Date: 06.05.2026 KA

5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 11545/2026 Date: 06.05.2026 KA

Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.