Chandra Wati vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Chandra Wati, approached the High Court seeking cancellation of her GST registration. She alleged that her daughter-in-law had provided her address to obtain the registration. The petitioner's contention was that the daughter-in-law had given a wrong address. However, the writ petition lacked a specific averment stating that the son and daughter-in-law were not residing at the said house with the petitioner. The Court considered the bald statement made by the petitioner regarding the wrong address provided by her daughter-in-law.
Held
The Court held that a direction to decide the application for cancellation of GST registration was not required. The reasoning was based on the lack of a specific averment in the writ petition confirming that the son and daughter-in-law were not residing at the address with the petitioner. The Court considered the statement that the daughter-in-law had given a wrong address as a bald assertion without sufficient factual substantiation. Therefore, the Court found no grounds to issue a direction for deciding the cancellation application. The ratio decidendi is that a writ court will not issue directions based on unsubstantiated claims, especially when crucial factual averments are missing, and the petitioner has not demonstrated a clear case of grievance requiring intervention.
Key Issues
1. Whether the GST registration obtained by the daughter-in-law using the petitioner's address should be cancelled, considering the petitioner's allegation of a wrong address being provided? (Question of fact and law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that her daughter-in-law used her address to obtain GST registration, and this address was incorrect, necessitating cancellation. The petitioner relied on her assertion that the address was wrongly provided. Respondent's contention: The State did not record any specific arguments. However, the Court noted the absence of a specific averment in the writ petition that the son and daughter-in-law were not living in the said house with the mother, which was a crucial factual aspect.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 671 of 2018 Petitioner :- Chandra Wati Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J. A mother has approached to this Court alleging that her daughter-in-law has given her address to obtain the GST registration. It is, therefore, contended that the GST registration may be cancelled.
There is no averment in the writ petition that the son and daughter-in-law are not living in the said house with the mother and only a bald statement has been made that the daughter-in- law has given a wrong address.
In this view of the matter, the direction for deciding the application filed by the petitioner for cancelling the GST registration is not required to be issued.
This Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.4.2018 Junaid (Dilip Gupta,J) (Neeraj Tiwari,J)
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.