Mrs Shobnam Ara Begom Mazumder @ Sabnamara Begum Mazumder vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 Ors

Held

The Court held that the Show-Cause Notice issued to the petitioner was defective and violative of the principles of natural justice. Firstly, the notice provided only seven working days for the petitioner to furnish a reply and appear, whereas Rule 21A(2A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, mandates a period of thirty days for the noticee to explain non-compliance and show cause why their registration should not be cancelled. The authorities also passed the cancellation order on July 4, 2024, before the expiry of the thirty-day period from the date of the notice (June 10, 2024). Secondly, the Show-Cause Notice was issued in Form GST REG-17, while the rules prescribe Form GST REG-31 for cancellation of registration due to contravention of Rule 10A. The Court reiterated the principle that if a statute prescribes a specific manner for performing an act, it must be done in that manner only. Consequently, the Show-Cause Notice and the subsequent cancellation order were set aside and quashed. The Court directed the respondent authorities to restore the petitioner's GST registration.

Facts

The petitioner, Mrs. Shobnam Ara Begom Mazumder, obtained GST registration on June 13, 2023, for a goatery business. On June 10, 2024, the Superintendent of Central Goods and Service Tax issued a Show-Cause Notice for cancellation of her registration, citing violations of Rule 10A read with Rule 21(d) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The notice required a reply within seven days and an appearance on June 17, 2024. The petitioner claims she missed the notice due to its upload on the portal without individual communication. Subsequently, on July 4, 2024, the Superintendent passed an order cancelling the registration, noting the absence of a reply. The petitioner's attempts to upload bank details and file for revocation were unsuccessful due to expired limitations. This writ petition challenges the cancellation order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Show-Cause Notice issued for cancellation of GST registration, which provided only seven days for reply and appearance, violated the principles of natural justice and the provisions of Rule 21A(2A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, by not affording the statutorily prescribed thirty days for explanation? 2. Whether the Show-Cause Notice, issued in Form GST REG-17 instead of the prescribed Form GST REG-31, rendered the subsequent cancellation order invalid? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the seven-day period for responding to the Show-Cause Notice was insufficient and violated the principles of natural justice, as Rule 21A(2A) mandates a thirty-day period for explanation. Furthermore, the notice was issued in the wrong format (Form GST REG-17 instead of Form GST REG-31), which is a procedural irregularity. The petitioner contended that the authorities failed to adhere to the prescribed statutory procedure. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state.