ITC | Einvoice login | CBIC | GST portal | tax rea ltime

Share:-

Facts –

The Petitioner, Virendrer Kumar Jain, aged about 74 years and was engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading in copper wires under the name of M/s Virendra Wires.
On account of his ailing health, he could no longer carry on the business and accordingly, applied for cancellation of his GST Registration on 20.11.2020 with effect from the said date. The Respondent issued a notice stating that the petitioner’s application was not satisfied, and the petitioner failed to submit reply.
Respondent issued an order dated 16.02.2021 rejecting the petitioner’s application for cancellation of his registration.
Later on 02.11.2021 the respondent cancelled the registration of GST with retrospective effect from 01.07.2017 alleging that “the taxpayer found not functioning / non-existing at the principal place of business”.

Issue –

Order –

The Divisional Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that the show cause notice did not indicate that the concerned officer had proposed to cancel the same with retrospective effect and also does not indicate that any inquiries were made, which revealed that the petitioner had never existed at his declared place of business.
The order dated 02.11.2021 cancelling the petitioner’s registration also contains no reason whatsoever. It merely records that no reply was submitted to the show cause notice. It is an unreasoned order and completely disregards that the petitioner had filed an application dated 20.11.2020 for cancellation of his GST Registration and disclosed that he had stopped carrying on business.
Thus, the question of the petitioner being available at the principal place of business did not arise. It follows that this could not have been the ground for cancellation of the petitioner’s GST Registration with retrospective effect.
Hence the petition is allowed and direct that the cancellation of the petitioner’s GST Registration shall be effective from 20.11.2020.

Post Category