Noticing that the show cause notice (SCN) is blissfully vague and non-speaking, and the cancellation order also did not reflect any due consideration of the noticee’s response recording reasons for the drastic action of cancellation of the GST registration, the Bombay High Court quashed the show cause notice (SCN), the GST cancellation order, as well as the rejection of the application for revocation of the cancellation, and declared the revival of the Petitioner’s GST registration.
The Division Bench comprising Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain observed that the show-cause notice does not allege noncompliance with any specific provisions of the Act or rules. The Bench emphasized that a general statement about non-compliance with any specified provisions of the GST Act or rules does not amount to giving a valid show cause notice, nor does it amount to providing a reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner to show cause for any alleged violation.
In this case, the challenge against the SCN, the GST cancellation order, as well as the application for revocation of the cancellation, stood rejected, and the appeal against the order of cancellation was also dismissed on grounds of limitation. Challenging the denial of fair play and natural justice, the Petitioner approached the High Court.
Observing that the entire purpose of issuing an SCN is to enable the notice recipient to know the charge so as to file an effective response or explanation, and a vague SCN frustrates this purpose, Justice Sonak, speaking for the Bench, was amazed to find that even the order for cancellation of the GST registration also did not specifically mention about the cancellation of registration except in its title.
Further, noticing that even the rejection of the application for revocation of cancellation did not indicate any consideration of the compliance filed by the Petitioner, the Bench stated that mere mentioning of non-submission of the valid address proof for the place of business is more of a conclusion rather than a reason. Therefore, the Bench quashed all the orders and revived the Petitioner’s registration.
Appearances:
Advocate Raja G. Valechha, for the Petitioner
Advocates Karan Adik, Sangeeta Yadav, Umesh Gupta, and Parimal Wagh, for the Respondents