Gujarat High Court: In a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ and quashing the order of the Assistant Commissioner, Chatak 19, Ahmedabad, whereby, the GST Registration Number of the petitioner’s firm was cancelled, a division Bench of Vipul M. Pancholi* and Devan M. Desai JJ., has set aside the said order as it was vague and does not provide any sufficient information.
The petitioner’s firm was registered under the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (‘GST Act’). A show cause notice dated 01-07-2022 was issued by the respondent under Section 29 of the GST Act with rule 22(1) of the GST Rules, 2017, in which it was vaguely mentioned that, ‘in case the registration was obtained by fraud, willful misstatement or concealment of facts, it could be cancelled’. The petitioner claimed that no notice was received by him at his registered place of business. Thereafter, another Order dated 15-07-2022 was also passed, cancelling the firm’s GST registration. The petitioner challenged the impugned cancellation order on the grounds that the show cause notice given by the respondent was vague and did not provide sufficient information making it difficult for him to reply.
The Court relied on Aggrawal Dyeing and Printing Works v. State of Gujarat1 and said that the show cause notice dated 01.07.2022 issued by the respondent to the petitioner was very vague and cryptic, making it difficult for the petitioner to give any reply to the said show cause notice. The Court noted that an order was passed on 15-07-2022 and viewed that the respondent had failed to provide specific reasons for cancellation of registration under Section 29(2) of the GST Act. Therefore, the Court allowed the petition and quashed and set aside the show cause notice dated 01-07-2022 as well as the order dated 15-07-2022. The Court also granted liberty to the respondent authorities to issue fresh notice, including the detailed reasons and thereafter to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. The respondent was directed to restore the registration of the petitioner.
[Sona Metals v. State of Gujarat, 2023 SCC OnLine Guj 1704, Order Dated: 15-06-2023]
*Judgment Authored by: Justice Vipul M. Pancholi
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioners- Advocate MG Nanavati;
For the Respondents- Assistant Government Pleader Pranav Trivedi.
1. Special Civil Application No. 18860/2021.