Vsb Logistic Company vs. State Of Punjab And Others

Facts

The petitioner, VSB Logistic Company, a registered entity under the GST regime, had its GST registration cancelled by the respondents with effect from June 7, 2018, without prior notice. The petitioner alleged that it had successfully filed all required GST returns. Attempts to apply online for revocation of the cancellation were unsuccessful as the web portal did not accept such applications. Representations made to the respondents also failed to yield any positive outcome, leading the petitioner to file a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to revoke the cancellation of its GST registration.

Held

The Court noted that at the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the present petition had become infructuous because the request for revocation of the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration had been accepted. This statement was not controverted by the learned counsel for the respondents. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the petition as infructuous. The Court did not delve into the merits of the cancellation or the procedural irregularities alleged by the petitioner, as the matter was resolved by the subsequent acceptance of the revocation request. The specific reasons for the initial cancellation or the acceptance of the revocation are not detailed in the judgment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was valid, considering the petitioner's alleged compliance with filing requirements and the lack of prior notice. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that its GST registration was cancelled arbitrarily and without proper procedure, as it had consistently filed its GST returns. The inability to apply for revocation online and the lack of response to representations further supported their claim of procedural unfairness. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents. However, their presence and participation in the proceedings indicate a defense against the petitioner's claims. The fact that the revocation request was eventually accepted suggests that the initial cancellation might have been based on some grounds, which were later rectified or accepted for revocation.