M/S Bala Ji Medical Ajency Thru. Proprietor Mr. Jitendra Mishra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax U.P. Lko. And 2 Others
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT TAX No. - 867 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondents.
This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "I. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in nature of 'Certiorari' thereby quashing the impugned order issued to the petitioner's firm vide the impugned GST REG-19 i.e. order for cancellation of registration dated 02/05/2024 passed by the opposite party no.3, i.e. Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Rai Bareli, U.P. by means of which the O.P. No. 3 has cancelled the GST registration of the petitioner's firm. (contained as Annexure No.1)."
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a proprietorship firm registered in August, 2022. Due to some unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner was unable to file return as required under the Act and Rules, a Show Cause Notice for cancellation of registration of GST REG-17 has been issued to the petitioner on 12.03.2024 seeking a reply within 30 days and fixing time and date of personal hearing as 11:00 AM on 09.04.2024 without disclosing the venue/place where the petitioner had to appear to show cause. The Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Punit Kumar Srivastava, Ishank Srivastava, Rakesh Srivastava, Shashank Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Bala Ji Medical Ajency Thru. Proprietor Mr. Jitendra Mishra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax U.P. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
petitioner was not issued any manual notice. Straightaway, the cancellation order has been passed.
We have gone through the order dated 02.05.2024 which says that despite notice having been issued to show cause on failure to furnish returns for prescribed period, the registration has been cancelled.
In the entire writ petition there is no mention of any reason why a written reply to the show cause notice was not submitted by the petitioner despite notice dated 12.03.2014 having been served upon him. The notice dated 12.03.2024 stated clearly that if the assessee fails to furnish a reply within the stipulated date or fails to appear for personal hearing on the date and time the case will decided ex parte on the basis of available records and on merits.
We find from a perusal of the notice dated 12.03.2024 that the petitioner was given 30 days time from the date of service of notice to submit his reply the 30 days time would continue till 12.04.2024, however, the petitioner was directed to appear before the Juri ictional Officer before such time expired on 09.04.2024. The notice issued to the petitioner is bad in law. The notice dated 12.03.2024 is quashed. The Consequential Order dated 02.05.2024 is also quashed leaving it open for the respondent to issue fresh show cause notice to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed only to that extent. September 2, 2025 Darpan Sharma WTAX No. 867 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) DARPAN SHARMA 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.