Rais Khan vs. Assistant Commissioner And Another
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Rais Khan, challenged an order dated 01.11.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, cancelling his GST registration. The petitioner contended that a show cause notice was issued on 18.10.2022, but due to its improper uploading on the portal, he could not file a response. Consequently, the order was passed without providing an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner also mentioned filing an appeal against the impugned order, which was barred by limitation, and he intended to withdraw it. The Standing Counsel supported the impugned order.
Held
The Court held that the order dated 01.11.2022, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, was passed without application of mind. Although the petitioner admitted to not filing a response to the show cause notice, the impugned order itself contained a contradictory statement indicating that a reply dated 30.10.2022 was examined, yet the cancellation was based on 'no response received'. This inconsistency clearly demonstrated a non-application of mind by the officer. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order. The petitioner was granted liberty to file a response to the show cause notice within 15 days. Upon filing the response, the respondent was directed to provide an opportunity of hearing and decide the matter expeditiously. The Court did not delve into other aspects raised by the petitioner.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, dated 01.11.2022, is liable to be quashed and set aside for being passed without providing an adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in violation of principles of natural justice? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was not properly accessible on the portal, preventing him from filing a response. The impugned order was passed without affording him a hearing, thus violating natural justice principles. The petitioner also indicated an intention to withdraw a separate appeal due to limitation issues. Respondent's arguments: The learned Standing Counsel supported the impugned order, but no specific arguments were recorded in the judgment regarding the procedural infirmities raised by the petitioner.
Sections Cited
Section 129
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33692-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 618 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rais Khan Respondent :- Assistant Commissioner and another Counsel for Petitioner :- Vibhuti Narain Counsel for Respondent :- Ankur Agarwal, S.C. Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.11.2022 passed by the respondent no. 1 cancelling the petitioner's registration under the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2. Submissions have been made that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 18.10.2022, however, due to uploading of the notice on Additional Tab of the Portal, he could not file response to the said notice and without providing any opportunity of hearing, the order impugned has been passed and, therefore, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.
It is also submitted that an appeal has been filed by the petitioner against the order impugned, as the same is barred by limitation and the power to condone the delay is limited, the same is otherwise liable to be dismissed and therefore, the petitioner would withdraw the same.
Learned Standing Counsel supported the order impugned.
We have considered the submissions and have perused the material available on record.
A bare perusal of order dated 01.11.2022 (Annexure-1 to the petition) reveals that the same has been passed without any application of mind. Admittedly, no response to the show cause notice was given by the petitioner, however, the order indicates that reply dated 30.10.2022 was filed which was examined and for the reason 'no response received', the registration has been cancelled.
The very fact that though no response was given by the petitioner to indicate that the response was received and then to cancel the registration on non-receipt of any response clearly reflects non application of mind by the officer for passing the order impugned.
In view of the above, without going into the other aspects of the matter as raised, we deem it appropriate and, therefore, set aside the order dated 01.11.2022 passed by respondent no.1. 8. The petitioner may file its response to the show cause notice dated 18.10.2022 within a period of 15 days, on filing of the said reply, the respondent no. 1 after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, would decide the same with expedition.
The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Order Date :- 7.3.2025 nd (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) NISITH DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
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.