Full Judgment Text
$~52
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 12.08.2024
+ W.P.(C) 10986/2024
M/S STAR ENTERPRISES THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SH.
HARSH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vineet Bhatia, Mr. Bipin
Punia, Ms. Aamnaya Jagannath
Mishra and Mr. Keshav Garg,
Advs.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GST AND ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal, ASC and
Mr. Shubham Goel, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order
dated 20.01.2022 (hereafter the impugned order ), whereby the
petitioner’s Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration was cancelled
with retrospective effect.
2. The petitioner was registered under the Central Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the CGST Act ) and was assigned the
Goods and Services Tax Identification Number (GSTIN)
07AJPPH0815A1ZP.
3. The petitioner was issued a Show Cause Notice dated
21.12.2021 (hereafter the SCN ), whereby the petitioner was called
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DUSHYANT RAWAL
Signing Date:14.08.2024
17:47:08
W.P.(C) 10986/2024 Page 1 of 4
upon to show cause why its registration not be cancelled. The reasons
set out in the SCN allude to the provisions to file returns under Section
39 of the CGST Act and the details of outward supplies furnished by
the petitioner in Form GSTR-1. However, it does not contain any
allegation that the said provisions were not complied with or any
discrepancy was foundin the returns furnished by the petitioner in
Form GSTR-1. The reasons simply mention the returns furnished by
the petitioner under Section 39 of the CGST Act and details of the
outwards supplies furnished by the petitioner in Form GSTR-1.
However, the SCN also alleged that the petitioner had not complied
with the provisions of law and was not found functioning at the time
of field visit.
4. The petitioner was called upon to respond to the SCN within a
period of 30 days from the date of the SCN and was also directed to
appear before the concerned proper officer on 23.12.2021.
5. Thereafter, the petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled by
the impugned order. The impugned order does not mention any reason
for cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration but merely states that
the same is in reference to the SCN and that the petitioner did not
appear on the date fixed for hearing. The tabular statement set out in
the impugned order indicates that no tax or other dues were
determined as payable by the petitioner.
6. The petitioner claims that he filed the reply to the SCN
belatedly stating that he was not available at the time of field visit as
he was travelling outside Delhi for business. He also requested that the
physical verification of his place of business be conducted once again.
W.P.(C) 10986/2024 Page 2 of 4
The impugned order does not indicate that the explanations furnished
by the petitioner were considered; as stated above, no reasonsare
provided for rejecting the same.
7. It is also important to note that the impugned order cancels the
petitioner’s GST registration with retrospective effect from
17.07.2021. However, the SCN does not mention any such proposed
action. More importantly, the impugned order also does not reflect any
reason for the same.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has since closed down his business and is not aggrieved by
cancellation of his GST registration. He is, however, aggrieved by
cancellation of his registration being operative retrospectively. He also
states that the petitioner has already filed his returns belatedly.
9. Mr. Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents
states that he has no objection if the impugned order is modified to
effect that the cancellation of the petitioner’s registration be made
prospectively from the date of the SCN as the petitioner’s GST was
suspended from the date of issuance of the SCN – with effect from
21.12.2021.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner concurs with the said
submissions.
11. In view of the above, we direct that the impugned order
cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration would be operative with
effect from 21.12.2021 and not with effect from 17.07.2021. The
impugned order is modified to the aforesaid extent.
12. It is clarified that this would not preclude the concerned
W.P.(C) 10986/2024 Page 3 of 4
authorities from initiating any action, if so warranted, in accordance
with law. This will also include the cancellation of the petitioner’s
GST registration with the retrospective effect, if the proper officer
considers it necessary.
13. The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
SACHIN DATTA, J
AUGUST 12, 2024/ cl
W.P.(C) 10986/2024 Page 4 of 4