Dayamalam Consulting And Construction PVT. LTD. Thru. Its Director Daya Ram Yadav Lko. vs. Union Of INDIA Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Finance North Block New Delhi And 5 Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Dayamalam Consulting And Construction Pvt. Ltd., challenges two orders: the cancellation of its GST registration on March 7, 2022, and the dismissal of its appeal on September 19, 2022. The petitioner, engaged in civil work contracts, claims it did not receive the show cause notice dated February 3, 2022, issued by the respondent authorities. Consequently, it could not file a reply within the stipulated seven working days, leading to the cancellation of its registration. The appeal against this cancellation was dismissed by the appellate authority on grounds of delay. The petitioner argues that the cancellation order was passed without affording it a proper hearing.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition. It held that the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration dated March 7, 2022, and the subsequent appellate order dated September 19, 2022, were liable to be set aside. The Court reasoned that the cancellation order was passed without assigning any specific reasons, relying only on the petitioner's failure to submit a reply to the show cause notice. This was found to be contrary to the principles of natural justice and the established legal position that non-submission of a reply alone cannot be a ground for cancellation without proper application of mind. The Court followed its own previous judgment in Writ Tax No. 145 of 2022 (Technosum India Pvt. Ltd. Lucknow Vs. Union of India and others), which held that non-speaking orders lacking reasons are unsustainable. The Court directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent authorities within three weeks with a reply to the show cause notice and a copy of the Court's order and the cited judgment. Upon compliance, the respondents were directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order dated March 7, 2022, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, is liable to be set aside for being non-speaking and passed without proper application of mind, contrary to the principles of natural justice? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argues that the order cancelling its GST registration is non-speaking, as it was passed solely on the ground of non-submission of a reply to the show cause notice, without considering the merits. It relies on the judgment in Writ Tax No. 145 of 2022 (Technosum India Pvt. Ltd. Lucknow Vs. Union of India and others) which held that non-submission of a reply cannot be the sole ground for cancellation and that such orders lack reasons and application of mind, violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner asserts it is entitled to the benefit of this precedent. Revenue's contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the respondent revenue authorities.
Sections Cited
Section 14 of the Constitution of India (as referred to in the cited judgment)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 36 of 2023 Petitioner :- Dayamalam Consulting And Construction Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Director Daya Ram Yadav Lko. Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Finance North Block New Delhi And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mudit Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Dipak Seth Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. non-submission of reply to the show cause cannot be a ground
for cancellation of the registration. The relevant Paragraphs 9 and 10, of the judgment in Technosum India Pvt. Ltd. Lucknow (Supra), read as under:- "
The Counsel for the petitioner argues that the appeal has been dismissed as being beyond limitation as such the doctrine of merger would not apply and the petitioner is fair entitled to seek judicial review of the order dated 03.01.2022 on the ground that the same is non speaking order. This Court while deciding Writ Tax No.147 of 2022 (M/S Chandrasen, Sarda M/s Chandrasen (Supra), the writ petition deserves to be allowed." [Vivek Chaudhary J.] Order Date :- 10.2.2023 -Amit K- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
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.