High Court Sets Aside Rejection of GST Registration Amendment and Orders Review of Cancellation

Case Name:

M/S SAI ALUMINIUM EXIM vs. PR COMMISSIONER OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX NORTH DELHI

Key Takeaways:

1. The rejection of the petitioner’s application for amendment of the GST registration was set aside by the High Court.
2. The petitioner was given the liberty to file all requisite documents and information in support of its application for revocation of the cancellation of GST registration.
3. The concerned officer was directed to review the cancellation and satisfy that the petitioner is carrying on the business at its principal place of business as claimed.

Case Synopsis:

The is a judgment from the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, dated 10th November 2023, regarding a writ petition (W.P.(C) 14814/2023) filed by M/S SAI ALUMINIUM EXIM against the PR Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax North Delhi.

The petitioner sought relief in the form of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to direct the respondent to revoke the GST registration of the petitioner. Additionally, the petitioner requested a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction to quash and set aside the order dated 14th September 2023 issued by the respondent cancelling the registration of the petitioner.

The court noted that the petitioner was registered with the GST authorities with effect from 1st July 2017 (GSTIN 07BBZPS9347B1ZX) and had applied for an amendment in its GST registration to reflect the change in its principal place of business in the year 2022. However, the petitioner’s application for amendment was rejected on 9th May 2023 on the ground that the requisite information was not submitted.

Subsequently, a Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued to the petitioner on 1st September 2023 proposing to cancel its GST registration under Section 29(2)(e) of the GST Act, which deals with registration obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts. The petitioner was called upon to appear before the concerned officer and file a reply to the SCN within a period of seven working days. The petitioner’s GST registration was also suspended with effect from 1st September 2023.

The court observed that the SCN did not specify the alleged fraud committed by the petitioner or the wilful misstatement made by it. However, the petitioner’s name featured at serial no.10 of a list provided by the Anti Evasion Branch, which stated that certain taxpayers were found to be non-existent and requested for initiation of proceedings in that regard.

The court further noted that the letter from the Assistant Commissioner, Anti Evasion Branch, enclosed visit reports, panchnama, geotag photo of principal place of business, etc., but the relevant documents related to the petitioner were not forwarded to the petitioner.

The impugned order cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration was dated 14th September 2023 and did not mention any reason for the cancellation. It merely stated that the order has been passed with reference to the SCN. The petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 1st July 2017, even though the SCN did not propose the retrospective cancellation of the petitioner’s GST registration.

The court considered the petitioner’s contentions and found merit in them. It set aside the order dated 9th May 2023 whereby the petitioner’s application for amendment of the GST registration was rejected. The petitioner was given the liberty to file all requisite documents and information as required by the GST authorities before the concerned officer in support of its application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration. The concerned officer was directed to satisfy that the petitioner is carrying on the business at its principal place of business as claimed by the petitioner. If satisfied, the order cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration was to be revoked.

In conclusion, the petition was disposed of in the aforesaid terms by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi on 10th November 2023.

FAQ:

Q1: What relief did the petitioner seek in the writ petition?

A1: The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to revoke the GST registration and a writ of certiorari to quash the order cancelling the registration.

Q2: What was the outcome of the judgment?

A2: The High Court set aside the rejection of the petitioner’s application for amendment of the GST registration and directed the concerned officer to review the cancellation of the GST registration based on the documents and information provided by the petitioner.