TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 628X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nspection was carried out, petitioner was not found available at the subject premises. The Show Cause Notice dated 06.06.2023 does not bear the name and designation of the officer issuing the Show Cause Notice, though it required the petitioner to appear before the issuer of the notice. Further, the order of cancellation dated 15.06.2023 also does not give any reasons. It merely states reference to the Show Cause Notice issued dated 06.06.2023 and then states that the effective date of cancellation of registration is 26.10.2023 i.e., a retrospective date. In terms of Section 29(2) of the Act, the proper officer may cancel the GST registration of a person from such date including any retrospective date, as he may deem fit if the circumstance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... necessary compliances as required by Section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It is clarified that Respondents are also not precluded from taking any steps for recovery of any tax, penalty or interest that may be due in respect of the subject firm in accordance with law including retrospective cancellation of the GST registration. Petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Mr. N.K. Sharma and Mr. Kapil Gautam, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Raghvendra Shukla, Senior Panel Counsel for UOI. Mr. Anurag Ojha, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Subham Kumar and Mr. Vipul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner had discontinued its business. 8. Clearly, the order for cancellation on the ground that petitioner was found non-existent on 30.05.2023 ex-facie is not sustainable for the reason that on 12.04.2023, petitioner had himself applied for cancellation of registration on the ground of closure of business. It is but obvious that on 30.05.2023, when an inspection was carried out, petitioner was not found available at the subject premises. 9. Along with the counter-affidavit, the case of the respondent is that petitioner has wrongfully claimed certain Input Tax Credit without the underlying supplies and supporting documents. 10. We are unable to accept the said contention of learned counsel for respondents for the reason that till the filing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when the returns were filed and the taxpayer was compliant. 14. It is important to note that, according to the respondent, one of the consequences for cancelling a taxpayer s registration with retrospective effect is that the taxpayer s customers are denied the input tax credit availed in respect of the supplies made by the tax payer during such period. Although, we do not consider it apposite to examine this aspect but assuming that the respondent s contention in required to consider this aspect while passing any order for cancellation of GST registration with retrospective effect. Thus, a taxpayer's registration can be cancelled with retrospective effect on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
