TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 932X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the petitioner for conducting iron and steel business from 2012 to May 2017. However, after May 2017, no business activity was carried out from there, and the building was rented out to another person since 18th August 2017. The petitioner did not file any document for the change of his business place nor he supported his claim that he was running the business from the given address by producing any documentary or oral evidence. The enquiry conducted by the competent officer is not a trial, but it is summary proceedings to find out whether the registered dealer is conducting any business from his declared place of business or not. There has been no infraction of principle of natural justice or the authority has acted arbitrarily as contended or otherwise. Petition dismissed. - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH For The Petitioner: By Advs., Harisankar V. Menon, Meera V. Menon, R. Sreejith, K. Krishna, Parvathy Menon For The Respondents: None Other Present: Jasmine M.M.-GP JUDGMENT DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of Exts. P4 and P5 orders whereby the petitioner s GST registration in exercising the powers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of rent for a few months, but that does not mean that the petitioner has been ousted from the said premises. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent has placed reliance on the statement of a third party, therefore, the petitioners should have been afforded an opportunity to examine the said person who is the owner of the building. In support of the said submission, the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of C.K.Sunny v Sales Tax Officer (2005) 139 STC 186. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has remedy of appeal against the impugned orders, however, as there is violation of principles of natural justice, the petitioner has approached this Court with this Writ Petition. 6. Learned Government Pleader has opposed the Writ Petition and submitted that the provisions of Section 29(2) and Rule 21(a) do not provide for cross-examination of the person whose statement has been taken into consideration regarding business activity of a dealer from the premises given as address in the GST registration. It was for the petitioner to prove that he was carrying out his business activities from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub-section (3) of section 25 has not commenced business within six months from the date of registration; or (e) registration has been obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts: Provided that the proper officer shall not cancel the registration without giving the person an opportunity of being heard. Provided further that during pendency of the proceedings relating to cancellation of registration, the proper officer may suspend the registration for such period and in such manner as may be prescribed. [Refer Note 1(c)] (3) The cancellation of registration under this section shall not affect the liability of the person to pay tax and other dues under this Act or to discharge any obligation under this Act or the rules made thereunder for any period prior to the date of cancellation whether or not such tax and other dues are determined before or after the date of cancellation. (4) The cancellation of registration under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be a cancellation of registration under this Act. (5) Every registered person whose registration is cancelled shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conclusion that the return submitted by the assessee is incorrect or incomplete so as to warrant the making of a best judgment assessment. The question is what is the content of this provision which imposes an obligation on the Sales Tax Officer to give and confers a corresponding right on the assessee to be afforded, a reasonable opportunity to prove the correctness or completeness of such return . Now, obviously to prove means to establish the correctness or completeness of the return by any mode permissible under law. The usual mode recognised by law for proving a fact is by production of evidence and evidence includes oral evidence of witnesses. The opportunity to prove the correctness or completeness of the return would, therefore, necessarily carry with it the right to examine witnesses and that would include equally the right to cross-examine witnesses examined by the Sales Tax Officer. Here, in the present case, the return filed by the assessee appeared to the Sales Tax Officer to be incorrect or incomplete because certain sales appearing in the books of Hazi Usmankutty and other wholesale dealers were not shown in the books of account of the assessee. The Sales Tax Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nducted by the competent officer is not a trial, but it is summary proceedings to find out whether the registered dealer is conducting any business from his declared place of business or not. After forming the prima facie opinion, the petitioner was put to notice and was given time to file a reply and produce evidence. No contrary evidence he could produce regarding him continuing business from the given address. The judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v Vindhya Metal Corpn. [1997]91 Taxman 192(SC) does not have any application to the facts of the case. There, the said observation was made in respect of the finalisation of return where the assessing officer placed reliance on the statement of some witnesses to reject the self-assessment order and it was not a case of cancellation or registration where no business is being conducted from the premises of the given address. I, therefore, do not find that there has been any infraction of principle of natural justice or the authority has acted arbitrarily as contended or otherwise. Therefore, the writ petition fails and hence, it is hereby dismissed. However, if the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
