Drs Wood Products Lucknow Thru. Its Partner Sh. Arun Jindal vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko.Andors.
Held
The Court held that the show-cause notice for cancellation of registration was vague and lacked specific allegations or evidence. The rejection of the revocation application and the dismissal of the appeal were also found to be arbitrary and lacking in application of mind.
Facts
The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled for being non-functioning. Their application for revocation was rejected, and an appeal against this rejection was also dismissed. The petitioner claims they were unaware of the cancellation and that the authorities did not properly consider their submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the cancellation of GST registration and the subsequent rejection of revocation were arbitrary and lacked due process. Whether the authorities properly considered the petitioner's submissions and evidence.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 30, Rule 22(1), Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 A.F.R. Court No. - 17 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21692 of 2021 Petitioner :- Drs Wood Products Lucknow Thru. Its Partner Sh. Arun Jindal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko.Andors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Singh,Suyash Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Digvijay Nath Dubey Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard Shri Suyash Agarwal and Shri Alok Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel for respondent no.4. 2. The present petition has been filed 18.01.2021 whereby
the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been rejected. The said appeal was preferred against the order dated 15.07.2020 whereby the application for revocation of the cancellation of the registration was rejected.
The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on business of manufacture and trading of Veneer and was granted the registration number under CGST Act 2017. It is also claimed that prior to the enforcement of the GST, the petitioner was registered under the UPVAT Act and the CST Act also. It is also claimed that the assessments were carried out in respec
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.