M/S Ariskon Pharma PVT. LTD. vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Ariskon Pharma Pvt. Ltd., is challenging the cancellation of its GST registration by an order dated 04.08.2021, passed by the Assessing Officer. The petitioner filed an appeal against this order, but it was rejected due to delay. The petitioner then filed a writ petition before the High Court, arguing that the order of cancellation was non-speaking. The State submitted that the Assessing Officer had used the form GST REG-19. The Court noted that the Bihar Goods and Services Taxes Rules, 2017, mandate specific columns for reasons in GST REG-19, which were absent in the impugned order. The Court also acknowledged the absence of a GST Tribunal in Bihar.

Held

The Court held that the order dated 04.08.2021, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, was a non-speaking and cryptic order, lacking any reasons for the cancellation. This violated the principles of natural justice, as it did not refer to the show cause notice or the petitioner's response, making the reason for cancellation undecipherable. The Court relied on a previous judgment of another Division Bench in Manoj Kumar Sah versus The State of Bihar and Anr., which similarly quashed a non-speaking order of cancellation. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order. Additionally, the Court noted Notification No. 3 of 2023, which allows a further period up to 30.06.2023 for registered persons to apply for revocation of cancellation if the cancellation was for failure to file returns, subject to certain conditions regarding filing returns and making payments. The petitioner was directed to seek reconsideration of the issue in light of this notification and the Court's findings.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration is a non-speaking order, violating principles of natural justice, as argued by the petitioner? 2. Whether the Assessing Officer erred in not assigning reasons for cancellation, despite the requirements of Form GST REG-19 and the Bihar Goods and Services Taxes Rules, 2017, as contended by the petitioner? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the order of cancellation of registration was non-speaking, meaning it did not provide any reasons for the decision. This, they contended, violated the principles of natural justice. They relied on the format of Form GST REG-19, which has specific columns for reasons, and argued that the absence of such reasons rendered the order illegal. Revenue's Arguments: The State contended that the Assessing Officer had adopted the form GST REG-19. They did not explicitly argue that the order was speaking or that reasons were provided, but rather that the prescribed form was used.