A R Buildwell vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Commissioner
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, A R Buildwell, applied for revocation of the cancellation of its GST registration on 22.11.2024. The application for revocation was rejected by an order dated 07.02.2025. The rejection order stated that a Show Cause Notice was issued on 07.02.2025, the same date as the order, and the petitioner failed to reply. The petitioner contended that a Show Cause Notice was actually issued on 22.01.2025, and it could not reply due to suffering from typhoid fever, supported by a medical certificate dated 03.02.2025. The respondents contested the medical certificate.
Held
The Court held that the order rejecting the petitioner's application for revocation of GST registration was vulnerable and liable to be set aside. The primary reason for this decision was that the Show Cause Notice was issued on the same date, 07.02.2025, as the order of rejection. This procedural anomaly, on the face of it, made the order unsustainable as it did not provide the petitioner with a reasonable opportunity to present their response. While there was a contest to the medical certificate, the glaring fact of the simultaneous issuance of the notice and order was decisive. The Court set aside the impugned order and granted the petitioner two weeks from the date of the order to submit their response to the Show Cause Notice. The Department was granted liberty to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's reply.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order rejecting the petitioner's application for revocation of GST registration is vitiated due to the Show Cause Notice being issued on the same date as the rejection order, thereby denying the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to respond? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the rejection order was passed without affording a proper opportunity to reply to the Show Cause Notice. The issuance of the Show Cause Notice on the same date as the rejection order, coupled with the petitioner's illness, rendered the order unsustainable. The petitioner relied on the medical certificate to substantiate their inability to respond. Revenue's contention: The revenue contested the validity of the medical certificate provided by the petitioner.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT : (PER: SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.)
The petitioner applied for revocation of the order of cancellation of GST registration by order dated 22.11.2024. 2. The Application for revocation of the order of cancellation of GST registration has been rejected by order dated 07.02.2025 observing that the petitioner was issued a Show Cause Notice on 07.02.2025, i.e. on the same date, on which the order has been passed, but he has failed to reply to the said notice.
The case of the petitioner is that in fact, he was issued a Show Cause Notice on 22.01.2025 as to why his Application for revocation of the order of cancellation of GST registration be not rejected. The petitioner claims that he was suffering from typhoid fever and, therefore, he could not reply to the Show Cause Notice. In support of his case, he has annexed the Medical Certificate
UKHC010093632026
2026:UHC:5631-DB 2
issued by Dr. Rajesh Tewari, Physician & Child Specialist dated 03.02.2025. 4. Although there is some contest to the Medical Certificate, but the glaring fact is that the Show Cause Notice is stated to have been issued on the same date, on which the order of rejection has been passed, i.e. 07.02.2025, which, on the face of it, makes the order vulnerable and is, accordingly, set aside, leaving it open to the petitioner to submit his response to the Show Cause Notice within two weeks from today with liberty to the Department to pass a fresh order taking into consideration the reply, if any, filed by the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. _____________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
___________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
Dt: 10th July, 2026 Rathour PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=23699ccc2fd40ad81b6fd13323779d9e3aeb1097d1 7dbb53d481cabd25946eed, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=1F65499E931DF71CDAF92A40CC6179B8E01 0331BA695239171F906FD5C45C4E8, cn=PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2026.07.13 17:33:59 +05'30'
Reproduced from the public record of the Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.