Girish Chandra Shukla,Proprietor Of M/S Garg Construction,Amethi vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Institutional Finance, Lko. And Others
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, finding the issue to be similar to those decided in Writ Tax No. 100 of 2022 and Writ Tax No. 147 of 2022. The reasoning was that the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration was non-speaking, which contravened established legal principles. The Court set aside the impugned orders and directed the petitioner to file his reply to the show cause notice. The respondent no. 2 was then instructed to pass fresh orders after considering the law laid down by the High Court of Madras in TVL Suguna Cutpiece Center (supra). The ratio decidendi is that non-speaking orders cancelling GST registration are liable to be set aside, with a direction for a fresh consideration after the assessee is given an opportunity to respond to the show cause notice. The appeal was disposed of on these grounds and terms.
Facts
The petitioner, Girish Chandra Shukla, Proprietor of M/s Garg Construction, Amethi, filed a writ petition challenging two orders. The first order, dated 15.10.2019, cancelled his GST registration certificate. The second order, dated 17.08.2022, dismissed his appeal against the cancellation order solely on the grounds of limitation. The petitioner argued that the cancellation order was non-speaking. He relied on previous decisions of this Court in Writ Tax No. 100 of 2022 and Writ Tax No. 147 of 2022, which dealt with similar issues and directed a rehearing. He also cited a judgment from the Madras High Court in TVL Suguna Cutpiece Center vs. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), Salem.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration certificate is a non-speaking order, violating principles of natural justice? The petitioner contended that the order cancelling his GST registration was non-speaking, rendering it invalid. He argued that this Court had previously set aside similar orders in Writ Tax No. 100 of 2022 and Writ Tax No. 147 of 2022, directing a rehearing. He further supported his argument by referencing the Madras High Court's decision in TVL Suguna Cutpiece Center vs. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), Salem. The respondent, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not present any arguments on this issue as recorded in the judgment.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 142 of 2022 Petitioner :- Girish Chandra Shukla,Proprietor Of M/S Garg Construction,Amethi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Institutional Finance, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. Counter Affidavit filed by the Standing Counsel is taken on record. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 15.10.2019 (Annexure no.3) whereby the registration certificate of the petitioner issued under GST has been cancelled as well as the appellate order dated 17.08.2022 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed only on the ground of limitation. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the order cancelling the registration is a non- speaking order, which is clear from the perusal of Annexure no.
He argues that this court in similar circumstances has decided a writ petition being Writ Tax No.100 of 2022 as well as Writ Tax No.147 of 2022 in which the similar issue was considered by this Court and the order cancelling the registration
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.