M/S Kuber Bhandar vs. The Union Of INDIA

Original PDF →
CWJC/1258/2023HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01106244202221 April 2023Bench: MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD,THE CHIEF JUSTICE-4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Kuber Bhandar, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 03.08.2022, which cancelled its GST registration. The petitioner argued that the order was non-speaking and lacked reasons. The respondents, represented by the Union of India and various CGST authorities, submitted that the Assessing Officer adopted the form GST REG-19. The Court noted that GST REG-19 has a specific column for reasons, which was not filled. The Court also referred to a previous judgment in Manoj Kumar Sah versus The State of Bihar and Anr., which highlighted similar illegality in a non-speaking order of cancellation. The Court considered Notification No. 3 of 2023, which provided a further period for registered persons to apply for revocation of cancellation under certain conditions.

Held

The Court held that the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration (Annexure-3) was illegal because it was a non-speaking order, failing to provide any reasons for the cancellation. The Court found that the Assessing Officer appeared to be under the misconception that no reasons need to be assigned if the assessee does not appear or file an objection. This contradicted the specific column for reasons in the prescribed form GST REG-19 under the Bihar Goods and Services Taxes Rules, 2017. The Court explicitly stated that it could not countenance such an order, especially when no reasons were given. Citing the precedent in Manoj Kumar Sah versus The State of Bihar and Anr., the Court found the impugned order suffered from the same illegality, violating the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court set aside the order at Annexure-3 and directed reconsideration of the issue. The Court also noted that Notification No. 3 of 2023 provided a remedy for revocation of cancellation under specific conditions related to failure to file returns, which the assessee could avail.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, being non-speaking and lacking reasons, violates the principles of natural justice, particularly in light of Rule 21 of the Bihar Goods and Services Taxes Rules, 2017, and the prescribed form GST REG-19? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the order of cancellation of registration was a non-speaking order, providing no reasons for the action taken. This violates the principles of natural justice and the requirements of the relevant GST rules and forms. The petitioner relied on the judgment in Manoj Kumar Sah versus The State of Bihar and Anr. Revenue's Arguments: The learned counsel for the State submitted that the Assessing Officer had adopted the form GST REG-19. The judgment does not record any further arguments from the revenue in defense of the non-speaking order.

Sections Cited

Section 29(2), Rule 21

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1258 of 2023 ====================================================== M/s Kuber Bhandar through its Proprietor, Vijay Kumar, Age- 50 years, Gender- Male, S/o - Late Baleshwar Saw, R/o Moghalpura, P.O. - Gulzarbagh, P.S. - Alamganj, Dist. - Patna - 7. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India through the Chief Commissioner, GST and CX, Patna. 2. The Joint Commissioner, CGST, Patna City Range, Patna. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, CGST, Patna City Range, Patna. 4. The Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Patna City Range, Patna. 5. The Superintendent, CGST, Patna City Range (Patna City West), Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N. Singh, Additional Solicitor General Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 21-04-2023

1.

The petitioner is aggrieved with the cancellation of registration by Annexure-3 order dated 03.08.2022. Insofar as the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act is concerned, now there is no Tribunal constituted for the State.

2.

In such circumstances, we have looked at the order at Annexure-3, especially since the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that it is a non-speaking order. We see from the order that there is no reason stated as to why the cancellation was ordered and not even the subject of the notice 2/4 is referred to in the order.

3.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the State that the form GST REG-19 has been adopted by the Assessing Officer.

4.

We extract form GST REG-19:-

5.

As we see from the Bihar Goods and Services Taxes Rules, 2017, GST REG-19 has a specific column where reasons have to be assigned. However, the Assessing Officer seems to be laboring under the belief that when an assessee does not appear or an objection is not filed, no reasons have to be assigned.

3/4

6.

We cannot countenance the said order, especially when there is absolutely no reason stated regarding the cancellation of registration.

7.

We also notice the judgment of another Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court passed in Manoj Kumar Sah versus The State of Bihar and Anr. in C.W.J.C. No. 18307 of 2022 wherein it has been stated so:- " It cannot be disputed that with the passing of the said order, petitioner is liable to both civil and penal consequences. To say the least, the authority ought to have at least referred to the contents of the show cause and the response thereto, which was not done. Not only the order is non- speaking, but cryptic in nature and the reason of cancellation not decipherable therefrom. Principles of natural justice stand violated and the order needs to be quashed as it entails penal and pecuniary consequences. "

8.

The impugned order in the instant writ petition also suffers from the very same illegality which has been pointed out by the Division Bench. In such circumstances, we set aside the order at Annexure-3 and direct reconsideration of the issue.

9.

In this context, we also notice that notification No. 3 of 2023 has been brought in by the Central Government on the recommendations of the G.S.T. Council wherein if the cancellation has been effected for failure to file returns under 4/4 clause (b) or clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 29, there is a further period allowed up to 30.06.2023, wherein the registered person can apply for invocation of cancellation. This is also subject to the condition that the return should be filed up to the effective date of cancellation of registration and the payment of tax, interest, penalty and late fee in respect of such returns have also been made. The assessee would also be entitled to avail of the said remedy if the cancellation has been effected under clause (b) or clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 29. 10. The writ petition stands allowed.

P.K.P./Anushka (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Madhuresh Prasad, J) AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 25.04.2023 Transmission Date

Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.