M/S. Holi Restaurant And Bar vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer

Held

The Court inclined to allow the Petitioner liberty to approach the competent authority within two weeks for submitting an application for revocation of GST registration. If the online submission was not accepted due to technical reasons, the Petitioner was permitted to submit the application in physical form. The competent authority was directed to entertain the application and decide it in accordance with the law within three weeks thereafter. The Court disposed of the writ petition on these terms. The specific issue of whether the cancellation violated principles of natural justice and constitutional safeguards was not explicitly decided, but the Court provided a procedural remedy.

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s. Holi Restaurant and Bar, had its GST registration cancelled by the Deputy State Tax Officer on 23.01.2024, with an effective cancellation date of 31.05.2022. The reason cited was failure to furnish returns for prescribed periods, under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act. The Petitioner contended that the non-filing was due to reliance on their accountant and unawareness of the show cause notice, and that they were unable to file an application for revocation of cancellation online as it was beyond the prescribed time limit. The Petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction to the respondent to entertain their application for revocation of cancellation manually.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, for failure to furnish returns, without proper notice and opportunity to be heard, violates the principles of natural justice and constitutional safeguards under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g)? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued that the cancellation was arbitrary, without cogent reasons, and in violation of principles of natural justice and constitutional safeguards. They claimed reliance on their accountant for filing returns and unawareness of the show cause notice. They also stated that they were prevented from filing a revocation application online due to time limitations. Revenue's Arguments: The Revenue submitted that the cancellation was due to the Petitioner's failure to furnish returns for prescribed periods.