M/S. Hithaishi Infra Machine vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St) (Fac)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order passed in Form GST DRC 07 vide Ref No ZD370325000355R dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) (hereinafter referred to as demand order ) as the cancellation of GST Registration itself is contrary to law and without juri iction, consequential demand for reversal of closing balance of ITC automatically fail and Order was Issued without affixing the signature, Order was issued with an incorrect DIN as invalid, arbitrary, without juri iction, unreasonable, and in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to Article 14, Article 19(1)(g), Article 265, Article 300A of the Constitution of India and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased stay the operation of the proceedings of the 1st Respondent in the Assessment Order passed in Form GST DRC 07 vide Ref No. ZD370325000355R dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.ANIL KUMAR BEZAWADA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
3 1.SANTHI CHANDRA (Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC) 2.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX
The Court made the following:
4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAO RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.27632 OF 2025 ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D. Sekhar)
The petitioner is a register dealer under the GST Act. The 2nd respondent issued show cause notice dated 24.08.2024 asking the petitioner to submit explanation as to why the GST registration of the petitioner shall not be cancelled on the ground that the petitioner is not conducting business at its principal place of business as per the registration certificate.
It is stated that the petitioner could not replied to the said show cause notice and thereafter the 2nd respondent by order dated 10.09.2024 cancelled the GST registration of the petitioner with effect from 16.07.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice dt.13.02.2025, directing him to reverse the closing balance of input tax credit lying in its Electronic Credit Ledger amounting to Rs.22,68,580/- as per Section 29(5) of the Act. Later, the 1st respondent passed assessment order dated 01.03.2025 confirming the demand for reversal of closing balance ITC as the registration of the petitioner itself was cancelled. Questioning the said order, the present writ petition is filed.
5
The counsel for the petitioner would contend that he would not give reply to the show cause notice inasmuch as its Accountant has left the petitioner’s firm during April, 2024. He would further submit that in view of cancellation of the registration of the petitioner, it had no information with regard to the issuance of show cause notice being uploaded in the GSTN portal. Apart from the same the order under challenge was assailed on various other grounds including lack of DIN and signature.
During the course of hearing, the counsel for the petitioner would submit that questioning the cancellation of registration of the petitioner, a writ petition vide WP No.26305 of 2025 was filed before this Court and the same was allowed by order dated 24.09.2025, consequently the registration of the petitioner’s firm was restored. He would further submit that in view of the restoration of the petitioner’s registration the question of reversal of closing balance of ITC does not arise and requested to set aside the order under challenge.
On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the same was passed on the ground that the petitioner has not filed Form-GSTR-10 or it obtained new GST registration to get transfer of such closing credit. As the petitioner has availed the said benefit of ITC amounting to Rs.22,68,580/-, it had to reverse
6 the same in view of cancellation of registration. Since, the registration of the petitioner was restored in view of order dated 24.09.2025 in WP No.26305 of 2025 passed by this Court, the question of reversal of closing balance of ITC does not arise in the case on hand. In view of the same, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed.
Needless to mention, this order will not preclude the respondents to initiate appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any shall stand closed. JUSTICE RAO RAGHUNANDAN RAO JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR 07.01.2026 DR
7 07 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.27632 of 2025 Date 07.01.2026 U DR
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.