M/S Power Plus Electricals vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Appeals- 5)

Held

The Court held that the order of cancellation of GST registration dated 28.03.2022, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, was violative of the principles of natural justice because it was passed without providing a sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, even though the petitioner had submitted a detailed reply to the show-cause notice. Consequently, the Court found it just and appropriate to set aside both the impugned orders. The matter was remitted back to the Assistant Commissioner for reconsideration afresh, with a direction to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law. Liberty was also granted to the petitioner to file additional pleadings and documents. The Court did not express an opinion on the merits or demerits of the rival contentions.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Power Plus Electricals, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 31.10.2022 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals-5) and an order dated 28.03.2022 cancelling its GST registration. The petitioner contended that the Assistant Commissioner passed the cancellation order without providing a sufficient or reasonable opportunity to be heard, despite the petitioner submitting a detailed reply to the show-cause notice. Furthermore, the petitioner argued that the Appellate Authority dismissed its statutory appeal as barred by limitation without appreciating the violation of principles of natural justice. The revenue supported the impugned orders, arguing there was no merit in the petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order of cancellation of GST registration dated 28.03.2022, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, is violative of the principles of natural justice for not providing a sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, despite a reply being filed to the show-cause notice? 2. Whether the order dated 31.10.2022, passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), is liable to be set aside for summarily dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation without considering the petitioner's contention regarding the violation of principles of natural justice in the original cancellation order? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the cancellation order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice. They also contended that the Appellate Authority erred in dismissing the appeal as time-barred without considering the violation of natural justice. Revenue's arguments: The revenue argued that the petition lacked merit and should be dismissed.