M/S Shivam Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the petitioner had not made out a prima facie case to interfere with the impugned actions of the respondents. The Court noted that the petitioner failed to furnish returns for six months, leading to the show cause notice. The petitioner did not avail the opportunity to reply to the show cause notice, resulting in the cancellation of registration. Subsequently, the petitioner's appeal before the appellate authority was also rejected. While the petitioner sought quashing of the orders and an alternative prayer for condonation of delay in filing revocation application, the Court found no grounds to interfere with the cancellation process based on the facts presented. However, the Court directed that if any provision of law allows the authorities to accept earlier returns and impose fines, damages, or interest, the petitioner should appear before the concerned authority with a detailed application. The concerned authority was then directed to examine whether the petitioner's grievance regarding cancellation and restoration of registration could be redressed at this distance of time.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Shivam Kumar, a proprietorship firm, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Appellate Authority (Respondent No. 3) dated 06.11.2024, which rejected their appeal. The petitioner also sought to quash the Show Cause Notice dated 15.01.2023 issued by the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax, Jamui (Respondent No. 4) for cancellation of GST registration, and the ex-parte order dated 30.03.2023 passed by Respondent No. 4 cancelling the registration. The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled for failing to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months. The petitioner did not file a reply to the show cause notice. The petitioner also prayed for an alternative relief to allow delayed filing of an application for revocation of the cancelled registration, subject to payment of dues.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order of the Appellate Authority dated 06.11.2024, passed in Appeal Case No- V (21) (22) / Appeals / Pat/GSTNBO/2024-25, rejecting the petitioner's appeal without granting an adequate opportunity of being heard, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). 2. Whether the Show Cause Notice dated 15.01.2023, issued by the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax, Jamui, for cancellation of GST registration, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact, turning on the validity of the cancellation proceedings). 3. Whether the ex-parte order dated 30.03.2023, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, passed without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing and as a non-speaking order, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and the requirement of speaking orders). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the appellate authority's order was passed without adequate opportunity of being heard and that the cancellation order was ex-parte and non-speaking, violating the principles of natural justice. They also sought condonation for delayed filing of revocation application. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondents. However, the court's observation implies that the respondents proceeded with cancellation due to the petitioner's failure to furnish returns and respond to the show cause notice.