Puthenveettil Constructions vs. Assistant Commissioner - Kerala High Court, 21 January 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 1ST MAGHA, 1943 WP( C) NO. 2210 OF 2022 PETITIONER: PUTHENVEETTIL CONSTRUCTIONS PUTHENVEETTIL, CHEPPAD, ALAPPUZHA - 690 507 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR.SUNIL PHILIP. BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL SRI.ANANDAPADMANABHAN UNNIKRISHNAN SMT.WAFA KHATHEEJA SRI.GOKUL ASOK ADV.SHERYL ELIZABATH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE GST DEPARTMENT, WORKS CONTRACT, BSNL BHAVAN, 2ND FLOOR, MULLAKKAL VILLAGE, XIII/915E, OPPOSITE HPO, ALAPPUZHA - 695 014. 2 STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. SMT.JASMIN M.M., GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C) No.2210/22 -:2:- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.2210 of 2022 -------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2022 JUDGMENT Petitioner impugns a very peculiar order in the form of Ext.P1. A perusal of Ext.P1 shows that the registration of the petitioner under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 has been cancelled by Ext.P1 in the following manner: “This has reference to your reply dated 29/12/2021 in response to the notice to show cause dated 02/12/2021 Whereas the undersigned has examined your reply and submissions made at the time of hearing, and is of the opinion that your registration is liable to be cancelled for the following reason(s). The effective date of cancellation of your registration is 01.01.2021”

On a perusal of the above extracted order, it is evident that no reasons have been mentioned to cancel the registration. The space for writing the reasons is kept blank. An order must speak for itself and reasons for an order cannot be supplemented or supplanted by the respondents later, either through affidavits or through oral submissions. In the aforesaid circumstance, the request of the learned Government Pleader to get instructions in

W.P.(C) No.2210/22 -:3:- the matter, is not required as it cannot advance the case of the respondents. Further, nothing can be supplemented or supplanted by the learned Government Pleader after getting instructions.

Absolutely, no reason is forthcoming in the impugned order cancelling registration. Cancellation of registration involves serious consequences and it must speak for itself. In view of the above, I find that Ext.P1 order is unsustainable in law and is liable to be quashed.

Accordingly I quash Ext.P1. However, having regard to the fact that Ext.P2 show cause notice has already been issued to the petitioner, the first respondent shall pass fresh orders, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after considering the reply submitted by the petitioner in a time bound manner. The writ petition is allowed as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps

W.P.(C) No.2210/22 -:4:- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2210/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04/01/2022 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 02/12/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FORM GST REG-31. EXHIBIT P3 PETITIONER'S REPLY DATED 29/12/2021 TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 02/12/2021. EXHIBIT P4 SCREENSHOT OF THE GST COMMON PORTAL SHOWING THE STATUS OF THE PETITIONER'S REPLY DATED 29/12/2021.