Aditya Auto Engineering PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court noted that both parties had argued the matter extensively and were in agreement with the Court's suggestion. The Court directed respondent No. 5 (Goods and Services Tax Network) to consider the petitioner's applications dated November 19, 2020, and November 27, 2020. These applications requested the rescission of the order by which the petitioner's GST registration was cancelled. The Court further stated that depending on the outcome of respondent No. 5's consideration, other claims of the petitioner would follow. The Court disposed of both writ petitions with all contentions kept open. Compliance was ordered within two months from the date a copy of the order is handed to respondent No. 5. No costs were awarded.

Facts

The petitioner, Aditya Auto Engineering Pvt. Ltd., filed two writ petitions before the Karnataka High Court. In W.P. No. 2803/2021, the petitioner challenged an order dated October 19, 2020, passed by the Superintendent of State Tax (R-3) cancelling its GST registration. The petitioner argued that this order was passed under an unconstitutional provision and violated principles of natural justice. In W.P. No. 52967/2019, the petitioner challenged orders dated October 25, 2019, and December 18, 2019, passed by the Superintendent of State Tax (R-3). The core issue in both petitions revolved around the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order for cancellation of registration passed by the Superintendent of State Tax on October 19, 2020, in W.P. No. 2803/2021, is unconstitutional and violative of the principles of natural justice? The petitioner contended that the cancellation order was passed without adhering to due process and natural justice principles, and potentially under an unconstitutional provision. The respondents' arguments on this specific issue are not explicitly recorded in the judgment. 2. Whether the impugned orders dated October 25, 2019, and December 18, 2019, passed by the Superintendent of State Tax in W.P. No. 52967/2019, are liable to be quashed? The petitioner's arguments for quashing these orders are not detailed, but they are linked to the cancellation of registration. The respondents' contentions are not recorded. The court noted that both sides had argued the matter at length and agreed to a suggestion for resolution.