9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 871X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the show cause notice dated 2.11.2022 for cancellation of registration as well as the order of cancellation of registration dated 21.11.2022 and order dated 30.11.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Appeals rejecting the appeal of the petitioner on the ground of limitation. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is engaged in the supply of scaffolding and dismantling services and all other ancillary services and the petitioner was also registered with the GST Department. 5. Assistant Commissioner, Ghatak-100, Jamnagar had issued a show cause notice in Form GST REG-17 dated 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T 10, GST DRC 01A, GST DRC 01 and GST DRC 07. It is the case of the petitioner that legal heir of deceased proprietor Subi Devi being an uneducated house-wife residing in Bihar was not aware about any of the notices and therefore, orders were passed ex-parte after the said demise of the proprietor of M/s. Bhagwati Construction. 12. The State Tax Officer thereafter had made a spot visit on 01.10.2022 at the registered business premises of M/s. Bhagwati Construction at Vinayak City, Plot No. 34/4, Naghedi, Jamnagar where the department found the owner of the premises who had rented the place to the petitioner's deceased husband for business purpose who informed the department about the death of proprietor of M/s. Bhagwati Construction. 13. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal. 17. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent no.2- Deputy Commissioner of State Tax Appeals, Rajkot without considering the submissions made in the appeal and in application of condonation of delay had rejected the appeal vide order dated 30.11.2023 on the ground that the appellate authority does not have power to condone the delay. 18. Being aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities, the petitioner had preferred the present petition. 19. Learned advocate Mr. Pandya for the petitioner submitted that proprietor of M/s. Bhagwati Construction Shri Amaresh Kumar Upadhyay expired on 05.12.2019 and this petition is filed by his wife Subi Devi as legal heir. 20. It was further submitted that show cause notice dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is registered under the provisions of the GST Act and no interference is called for in the impugned order. 25. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for both the sides and in view of facts emerging from the record, it appears that after the sad demise of husband of the petitioner - Subi Devi, no care is taken to comply with the provisions of GST Act by the brother-inlaw of the petitioner and no returns were filed and accordingly, no response was also given to the show cause notice issued by the respondent department. 26. Therefore, we are not going into the merits regarding as to whether the details of the show cause notice was served upon the petitioner or not. However, it would be relevant to consider the statement o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
