Santosh Kumar Singh vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, Santosh Kumar Singh, challenged an order of cancellation of his GST registration dated August 21, 2021, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Jhanjharpur. The petitioner argued that the impugned order was a non-speaking order, relying on a previous decision of the Patna High Court in Manoj Kumar Sah v. The State of Bihar & Anr. The State counsel brought to the court's attention Notification No. 03/2023 dated March 31, 2023, which provides relief to individuals who have not filed returns by allowing them to file by June 30, 2023, if their registration cancellation occurred before December 31, 2022. The petitioner's cancellation order was dated August 21, 2021, falling within the scope of this notification.

Held

The Court held that the impugned order of cancellation of GST registration dated August 21, 2021, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Jhanjharpur, was liable to be set aside. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's argument that the order was non-speaking, aligning with the precedent set in Manoj Kumar Sah v. The State of Bihar & Anr. Furthermore, the Court took into consideration Notification No. 03/2023 dated March 31, 2023, which provides an opportunity for taxpayers to regularize their filings if their registration was cancelled before December 31, 2022. Since the petitioner's cancellation order was dated August 21, 2021, it fell within the ambit of this notification. The Court's ratio decidendi is that non-speaking orders of cancellation are unsustainable, and where a subsequent notification provides a clear remedy for such situations, the taxpayer should be allowed to avail it. The Court set aside the impugned order and granted liberty to the petitioner to comply with the terms of the notification.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order of cancellation of GST registration dated August 21, 2021, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Jhanjharpur, is a non-speaking order, thereby rendering it invalid? (Question of law) Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that the impugned order is a non-speaking order, which is contrary to established legal principles, citing the decision in Manoj Kumar Sah v. The State of Bihar & Anr. as precedent. Revenue's contentions: The State counsel did not dispute the nature of the order but highlighted Notification No. 03/2023 dated March 31, 2023, which offers a remedial measure for individuals whose GST registration was cancelled prior to December 31, 2022, and who have not filed their returns. The State indicated that the petitioner's case falls under the purview of this notification.