Disposed

Salwa Foods Proprietorship Mr Amaan Sheikh v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Another

Delhi HC16 Dec 2024W.P.(C)/14187/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A proprietorship whose GST registration was cancelled retrospectively sought relief via writ petition. The High Court permitted it to apply afresh for registration, directing the competent authority to process any such application in accordance with law and the applicable CBIC Circular.

What the court decided

AI extract

Salwa Foods Proprietorship Mr Amaan Sheikh Vs… — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~50

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 14187/2024

¶4

SALWA FOODS PROPRIETORSHIP MR AMAAN SHEIKH .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar & Mr. Parveen Kumar Gambhir, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND ANOTHER .....Respondents Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, SSC with Ms. Suhani Mathur, Adv.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 16.12.2024

¶12

The writ petitioner impugns an order dated 09 December 2022 pursuant to which its registration under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 [“ CGST Act ”] came to be cancelled with retrospective effect from 28 December 2018.

¶13

We take note of the belated challenge which stands mounted by way of the instant writ petition. We also bear in consideration that the CGST Act does not disentitle or render the petitioner ineligible to apply for registration afresh and notwithstanding its registration having been cancelled on a previous occasion.

¶14

We take note of the following provisions which are made in a Circular dated 28 March 2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and which reads thus:

¶15

“ 4. It is hereby instructed that the proper officer may exercise due caution while processing the application for registration submitted by the taxpayers, where the tax payer

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 18/12/2024 at 11:46:25

¶18

is seeking another registration within the State although he has an existing registration within the said State or his earlier registration has been cancelled. It is clarified that not applying for revocation of cancellation of registration along with the continuance of the conditions specified in clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) of section 29 of the CGST Act shall be deemed to be a “deficiency” within the meaning of sub-rule (2) of rule 9 of the CGST Rules. The proper officer may compare the information pertaining to earlier registrations with the information contained in the present application, the grounds on which the earlier registration(s) were cancelled. The data may be verified on common portal by fetching the details of registration taken on the PAN mentioned in the new application vis-à-vis cancellation of registration obtained on same PAN is displayed on the common portal to both the applicant and the proper officer. Further, if required, information submitted by applicant in S.No.21 of FORM GST REG-01 regarding details of proprietor, all partner/Karta/Managing Directors and whole time Director/members of Managing Committee of Associations/Board of Trustees etc. may be analysed vis-àvis any cancelled registration having same details.

¶19

5. While considering the application for registration, the proper officer shall ascertain if the earlier registration was cancelled on account of violation of the provisions of clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) of section 29 of the CGST Act and whether the applicant has applied for revocation of cancellation of registration. If proper officer finds that application for revocation of cancellation of registration has not been filed and the conditions specified in clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) of section 29 of the CGST Act are still continuing, then, the same may be considered as a ground for rejection of application for registration in terms of sub-rule (2) read with sub-rule (4) of rule 9 of CGST Rules. Therefore, it is advised that where the applicant fails to furnish sufficient convincing justification or the proper officer is not satisfied with the clarification, information or documents furnished, then, his application for fresh registration may be considered for rejection.”

¶20

We, consequently, permit the petitioner to approach the competent authority of the respondents for the grant of registration afresh. Any such application that may be made, shall be disposed of in accordance with law and bearing in mind the provisions of the

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 18/12/2024 at 11:46:25

¶23

Circular which we have noticed hereinabove.

¶24

The writ petition shall stand disposed of on the aforesaid terms.

¶25

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

¶26

DHARMESH SHARMA, J.

¶27

DECEMBER 16, 2024/ kk

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 18/12/2024 at 11:46:25

Salwa Foods Proprietorship Mr Amaan Sheikh v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Salwa Foods Proprietorship Mr Amaan Sheikh v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajiv Enterprises (through Its Sole Proprietor Rajiv Daga) Vs Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax

State of Haryana Vs B M Institute of Engineering & Technology & Anr.

Anil Bhasin Vs Gaurav Gogna and Others

Gourav Vs Union of India & Ors.

Delhi Brush Manufacturing Association Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Jagdish Kumar Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Smt. Neelam Sathi Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Shri Upkar Singh Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Rajiv Enterprises (through Its Sole Proprietor Rajiv Daga) Vs Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax

Pr. Commissioner of Income TAX-6 Vs Mayar India Ltd.

M/S Ebix Asia Holdings Inc. Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Taxation (1)(2)(2) New Delhi

Musetta Builders and Developers Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 17(1) & Anr.

Pankaj Jain Vs Sudhir Jain

M/S G.S Industries Vs Commissioner of Central Tax and GST , Delhi ( West)