M/S S.A. Electricals,Gonda Thru. Proprietor, Smt. Jareena Khatoon And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (GST Tax Deptt.) Lko. And 2 Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, M/s S.A. Electricals and its proprietor, challenged two orders. The first order, dated 12.02.2024, cancelled their GST registration. The second order, dated 29.03.2025, dismissed their appeal against the cancellation as being filed beyond the limitation period. The petitioners contended that the order cancelling their registration was non-speaking and was passed without granting them an opportunity of hearing. They argued that the issue was covered by a previous judgment of the High Court.
Held
The Court held that the issue raised by the petitioners was squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in M/s Chandra Sain, Sarda Nagar, Lucknow Thru. Its Proprietor vs. U.O.I. & Ors. (Writ Tax No. 147 of 2022) decided on 22.09.2022. Following this precedent, the Court quashed both the order dated 12.02.2024, which cancelled the petitioners' registration, and the order dated 29.03.2025, which dismissed their appeal as being beyond limitation. The reasoning implicitly accepts the petitioners' contention that the cancellation order was flawed due to lack of hearing and being non-speaking. The ratio decidendi is that orders affecting a taxpayer's registration or appeal must adhere to principles of natural justice, including providing an opportunity of hearing, and must be reasoned. The Court remanded the matter to the assessing authority to pass fresh orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order cancelling the petitioners' GST registration, dated 12.02.2024, is a non-speaking order and was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, thereby violating principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the dismissal of the petitioners' appeal by the order dated 29.03.2025, on the ground of being beyond limitation, is sustainable in light of the alleged procedural infirmities in the initial cancellation order? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued that the order cancelling their registration was non-speaking and that no opportunity of hearing was granted prior to its passing. They relied on the judgment of this Court in M/s Chandra Sain, Sarda Nagar, Lucknow Thru. Its Proprietor vs. U.O.I. & Ors. (Writ Tax No. 147 of 2022) decided on 22.09.2022. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments for the respondents (State of U.P. and others).
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT TAX No. - 571 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. (Order on I.A. No. 4 of 2025) This listing application has been filed for early listing of the case. The said application is accompanied by the writ petition, the application is allowed and the writ petition heard to be on merit. (Order on Writ Petition)
Heard learned counsels for the parties.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging an order dated dated 12.02.2024 whereby the registration of the petitioners was cancelled as well as, the order dated 29.03.2025, whereby the appeal was dismissed as being beyond limitation.
The contention of counsel for the petitioners is that, the order of cancellation of registration is a non-speaking order and no opportunity of hearing was granted prior to the said order being passed.
The issue raised by the petitioners is squarely covered by the Judgment of this Court in the case of M/s Chandra Sain, Sarda Nagar, Lucknow Thru. Its Proprietor vs. U.O.I. & Ors. (Writ Tax No. 147 of 2022) on 22.09.2022. 5. Following the said judgment, orders dated 12.02.2024 & 29.03.2025 are quashed.
The petition is, accordingly, allowed. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dinesh Kumar Shukla, Pankaj Kumar Dixit Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S S.A. Electricals,Gonda Thru. Proprietor, Smt. Jareena Khatoon And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Gst Tax Deptt.) Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
Matter is remanded to the assessing authority to pass fresh orders, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
September 8, 2025 Pravee WTAX No. 571 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.