BharatTaxGST

M/S Vanshika Enterprises vs. The Union Of INDIA

Original PDF →
CWJC/18862/2025HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01104937202521 July 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA,MR. JUSTICE VIKASH KUMAR5 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18862 of 2025 ====================================================== M/s Vanshika Enterprises through its proprietor Mrs. Lalita Kumari Agarwal, Female, aged about- 33 Year, Khesara No- 2235 and 2237, Khata No 12 and 13, Fatehpur Sindhia, KTTG Main Road, Thakurganj, Kishanganj, Bihar, 855116, and residing at ward No.- 11, 11/1469, Nehru Road, Thakurganj, Post and P.S.- Thakurganj, Dist- Kishanganj- 855116, Mob- 7061218441, Adhar- 941055169440, E agarwal.anurag25@gamil.com consented by her to reply accordingly that first you have suspended the GSTN- 10BRNPA8396N1ZB ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India through the Principal Secretary, CGST, New Delhi. 2. The Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, Patna, Dist- Patna- 1. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of CGST Purnea Division, Purnea. 4. The Superintendent, CGST, Central Excise, Range- Kishanganj, Ward No- 24, Ruidhasa Mohalla, Near ST. child School, dist.- Kishanganj, egstkishanganjrange@gmail.com ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Ram Krishna, Senior Standing counsel for CGST ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH KUMAR

ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH KUMAR) 3 21-07-2026 Heard Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sriram Krishna, Sr. S.C, CGST, learned counsel for the respondent department.

2.

In present case, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of order dated 19.08.2025, whereby its registration was cancelled and further for quashing of order dated 01.09.2025, whereby the petitioner has been asked to reverse the ineligible ITC amounting to Rs. 5,57,244/- (IGST) received 2/5 from M/s J.K. Shrimali Enterprises in the month of February to April 2021 and further to stay the operation of impugned order dated 19.08.2025 and order dated 01.09.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a registered person and on application, was granted registration under the GST Act 2017, with effect from 07.02.2021, further amended vide order dated 11.06.2025, has filed its return and pays the tax within time.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the purposes of amendment in registration certificate it has filed online applications on three occasions that is 20.01.2022, 12.09.2022 and 11.06.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 13.08.2025, it was issued with the show cause notice under Section 29 to the extent that it has obtained registration by means of fraud, misstatement or suppression of facts. The petitioner has submitted his reply on 16.08.2025. The Respondent Authority without due consideration of the reply vide order dated 19.08.2025 has cancelled the GST registration of the petitioner.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 26.08.2025, the petitioner has filed revocation application under 3/5 Section 30 of the CGST/BGST Act 2017, which is still pending. The petitioner on being asked, has submitted the accounts document/26AS/Balance Sheet and sale & purchase etc. on 22.08.2025. 7. Per contra, Sriram Krishna, learned standing counsel CGST, relying on the contents of the counter affidavit filled on behalf of the Respondent Department submits that the Superintendent is the competent authority to cancel the GST registration under Section 29(2)e of CGST/BGST Act 2017, if the registration has been obtained by means of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts. The registration of the petitioner has been suspended under Section of 29 of the CGST Act was for violation of provisions of Section 16(2)b of the CGST Act, 2017 as the petitioner has availed illegal ITC of without actual receipt of goods. On certain inputs, it has come to the notice to the Respondent Department that the petitioner has availed ineligible Input Tax Credit on the strength of invoices issued by non-existent firm namely M/s J.K. Shrimali Enterprises. The petitioner was afforded the opportunity of personal hearing on 18.08.2025, but it chose not to appear. Even the reply dated 16.08.2025 was not found to be satisfactory and thereafter, the CGST registration of the petitioner was cancelled 4/5 on 19.08.2025. 8. Further the learned counsel for respondent department relying on paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit submits that GST registration of the petitioner was suspended with effect from 13.08.2025 and show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Section 29(2)e of the CGST Act, 2017. Further, on going through the profile of the petitioner it was found that Smt. Lalitia Kumar Agarwal has got consent from Kishan Lal Agarwal for doing business on this land but the said consent letter is illegible, and address was not visible. Further, the Municipal Tax receipt was also uploaded by the petitioner at the time of registration but no address was found mentioned on the same Municipal Tax receipt and submits that the present issue is related with disputes all facts which can be addressed by the learned Appellate Authority under the provision of 107 of CGST/BGST Act, 2017. 9. Heard the parties, it is admitted position that the petitioner has already submitted its reply to the show cause notice issued by the Respondent Department under Section 29 of the CGST/BGST Act. The revocation application filled by the petitioner is still pending. The respective submission with respect to cancellation of registration is confined to dispute of 5/5 facts which can well be adjudicated by the learned Appellate Authority under the provision of Section 107 of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017. Since the petitioner has preferred the present writ within a statutory period for filing appeal. The issue of limitation will not come in way for learned Appellate Authority in deciding the matter on merit.

10.

Accordingly, present writ application is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file an appeal against impugned order dated 17.08.2025, if so advised. If such appeal under Section 107 of the CGST/BGST Act 2017, is filed within three weeks from the date of receipt/production of the order, the learned Appellate Authority is directed to consider the appeal so filed on merit and to pass final order within a period of further four weeks after grant of proper opportunity including personal hearing to petitioner.

11.

The writ application is disposed off with aforesaid liberty.

ritesh/- (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) ( Vikash Kumar, J) U

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.