M/S. Vijaya Kankadurga Fabricaters vs. Superintendent Of Central Taxes

Goods and Scn iccs I ar (GS-I) Registration of the petitioner rvas cancelled vide ordcr dated 10.03.2026 0n the basis of the show cause notice dated 04.02.2026 alleging non_filing ol returns for a continuous period ol six rnonths. 'r'rre petitioner fired an application for revocation of cancellation ol'registration on 09.04.2026. A show cause notice was issued on 15 0'+ 1026 dirccring thc petitioner to pay the interest for delaycd pa],.tnent ot'tax. l he petitioner made payment of an amount ol Rs.62.,100,- turtards inrcres( rhrough [:orm GST DRC_03, which was also acknou,lcdged by issuance ol liorm GST DRC_04 by respondent No. [ . I Iori er cr. Llre pctit ioner could not furnish the reply to the show cause noticc rvithin tirre. as its Consultant was in personal difficulty. 'l'hat lcd ro rhc re.jccrron ol'thc application for revocation of cancellation bv thc irnpugrrcd ordcr clarctl 0j.06.2026 in Fonn GST REG_05. 4. Ihc pctirioncr has approached this court seeking an opportunity to lile a rcplr to rhe slrou eausc notice, as the compliance of payment ol due intcrcsr hiLs allcarir hccn tnade and acknowledged by respondcnt No l c),lr .n irec()rrl .r' rapse on behalf of the consultant or the petitio,e r. lrrc a1.rpric,ri., rir. rci.cation of cance ation got rejected r'i'hich cntails a(r\ cr\rr c().\cLr.c.c.s af'r-ecting continued ross of busincss of thc pcLiri.ncr'. I c.rre cl coLr,sel fbr the petitioner subrnits that if the rnattcr t t-e rrrittccl to r-c:l.rorrcle nt No. l.c61nps1art authority, the pctitioner

Learned Senior Standing Counsel lor CBIC appearing (br respondent No. I subrnits that the discrepancy pointed out in the show causc noticc dated 15.04.2026 was, of course, complied u'ith and acknori ledged by respondent No. 1 vide Form GST DRC-04 datcd 20.05.2026. but on account of failure to file the reply, the application tor rcvocation ofcancellation was rejected. This court may, therefore, pass appropriate orders as n-ray be deemed fit and proper in the circumstanccs o l' the casc.

C)n consideration of the rival submissions of the parties and th!- rnatcrial attcndant tacts noted above, it appears that the only discrcpancl' porntcd out in the show cause notice for rejection ol application lirr rcr ocation ol' cancellation of registration i.e., payment of intere st lirr tlclal ctl pa)Jrncnt of tax, was duly complied by the pctitioncr and acknosledgcd by respondent No.l, but tnere non-filing ot'rcpll to thc said shorr causc notice led to rejection of the application lor rcvtlcatiott ol'cancellation ofregistration by the impugned order. [t appcars that tlte c()rnpctcnt authorit)' did not take note ol the pa)'nlcnt of intcrcst alrcadl rnadc. thougli l'orrn GST DRC-04 was issued b1' the dcpartrnent irl acknou lcclqcrucnt thcreof. ln such circutnstanccs. the ordcr ol'rc.icction

I'lrc uril pclirion i\ irec()r(linel\ tlisposcd of. There shatt be no order as to c()st\ M isccllarreoLr' rrppl icirr iortr. r l' urtr pcuding. shall stancl closed. As\l .PONNA KRISHNA ANT REGTSTRAR ._-+j_- ,II To I Superintendent of Central Taxes. MrryalagrOa Mng., Rangareddy Comm iss ionerate, Telanga;a. The Principal Secretary Union of lidia, Government Finance. 3rd Floor Jeevan Deep Building. SansaA Vtarg, ECTION OFFICER Nalgonda Division, of lndia, Ministry of New Delhi-1'10 001 1

One CC to SRt r: I I\.{ARNATH REDDy, Advocate tOpUCl 4, ONE CC tO SRI^DOIVIINIC FERNANDES, SENIOd STANDING COUNSEL FOR CBtC IOPUC] t\ti 5 One CC ro SRt N BHUJANGA RAO, DEpUTy SOLIC|TOR GENERAL OF ff' tNDtA [opuc] 6 Two CD Copres