Allowed

Heera Lal Prop Utkarsh Traders v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Anr.

Delhi HC19 Sept 2024W.P.(C)/12696/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside a Show Cause Notice for cancelling GST registration as it merely cited the statutory provision without specifying factual allegations of fraud or suppression, rendering it incapable of eliciting a meaningful response. The registration was restored.

What did the court decide?

The impugned Show Cause Notice is set aside and the petitioner's GST registration is directed to be forthwith restored.

Heera Lal Prop Utkarsh Traders Vs Commissioner of Central… — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~1

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 12696/2024 & CM No.52864/2024 HEERA LAL PROP UTKARSH TRADERS .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Himanshu Jain, Adv.

¶5

Versus

¶6

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gibran Naushad, Adv.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 19.09.2024

¶10

The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the Show Cause Notice dated 21.08.2023 (hereafter the impugned SCN ) issued by the proper officer proposing to cancel the petitioner’s GST registration. The only reason set out in the impugned SCN for proposing to cancel the petitioner’s GST registration reads as under:

¶11

“1. Section 29(2)(e)-registration obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.”

¶12

The petitioner was called upon to furnish a reply to the impugned SCN within a period of seven working days from the date of service of the impugned SCN and to appear before the concerned proper officer on 28.08.2023 at 04:33 PM. Additionally, the petitioner’s GST registration was suspended with effect from 21.08.2023.

¶13

The petitioner filed a response to the impugned SCN stating that he had not obtained the registration by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. He submitted that the same was obtained on the basis of valid legal documents attached along with the said response. The petitioner also submitted copies of his Aadhar card; PAN card; Rent Agreement

¶14

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/07/2025 at 08:52:47

¶15

pertaining to his principal place of business and electricity bill. Admittedly, the impugned SCN has not been adjudicated till date. Consequently, the petitioner’s GST registration remains suspended without any adjudication.

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that there are several discrepancies in the documents submitted by the petitioner in response to the impugned SCN and the matter has been referred to Anti-Evasion Branch.

¶17

It is at once clear from the impugned SCN that the same fails to satisfy the minimum standard requirements of a show cause notice. The proper officer has merely reproduced Clause (e) of Section 29(2) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 which enables the proper officer to cancel a taxpayer’s GST registration if the same has been obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. The impugned SCN is bereft of any specific allegation. The impugned SCN neither indicates the alleged fraud nor the statement alleged to be a wilful misstatement. It provides no clue as to the facts alleged to have been suppressed.

¶18

The object of a show cause notice is to enable a noticee to respond to the allegations on the basis of which adverse action is proposed. Tested on the said anvil, the SCN is incapable of eliciting a meaningful response except a bare denial.

¶19

In view of the above, the impugned SCN is set aside. The respondents are directed to forthwith restore the petitioner’s GST registration. We clarify that this would not preclude the respondents from initiating any action for any statutory non-compliance or for recovery of dues in accordance with law.

¶20

¶21

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶22

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

¶23

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶24

SEPTEMBER 19, 2024 ‘gsr’

¶25

Heera Lal Prop Utkarsh Traders v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heera Lal Prop Utkarsh Traders v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar & Anr. Vs Harbans Gandhi & Ors.

Vikas Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi through Transport Commissioner

Rajender Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Rani Sharma Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Yogesh Paliwal Vs the Union of India & Ors.

Prashant Softwares Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

Mohd. Shahzad Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Aruna Tiku Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

R L Enterprises Vs Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax Delhi & Anr.

Arg Outlier Media Private Limited (Earlier Known as Arg Outlier Media Asianet News Pvt. Ltd) Vs Ht Media Limited

Esskcon Vs the Principal Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax & Anr.

Subhana Fashion Vs Commissioner Delhi Goods and Service Tax

M/S Hrc International. through Its Prop. Sh. Sunil Kumar Treepathi Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kunal Autotech Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.