Probin Saikia v. The Union of India and 3 Ors

ORDER

27.09.2024

Heard Mr. A Khanikar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Mr. SC Keyal, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondents.

¶2The instant writ petition is filed challenging the order bearing No.ZA181223011669K dated 15.12.2023 passed by the Respondent No.4 cancelling the GST Registration of the Petitioner.

¶3The facts as could be discerned from a perusal of the writ petition are that the Petitioner herein was granted a registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and was issued a certificate on 08.08.2023. However, the Petitioner could not file his return as mandated under law. A Show Cause notice was issued on 13.11.2023 by the competent authority asking the Petitioner to Show Cause as to why his registration should not be cancelled for not filing the returns under Section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. In the said Show Cause notice, it was also mentioned that the Registration of the Petitioner was suspended w.e.f. 13.11.2023. It is not known as to whether any Show Cause reply was filed by the petitioner.

¶4Be that as it may, on 15.12.2023, the Respondent No.4 cancelled the registration without assigning any reason. It is also seen from the records that Page No.# 3/4 the Petitioner claims that he had filed his returns thereafter in terms with Section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017. Thereupon, the instant writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner challenging the order of cancellation dated 15.12.2023.

¶5I have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and also perused the materials on record.

¶6A perusal of the impugned order dated 15.12.2023 would show that the said order is passed by a quasi judicial authority. The effect of the said order would be that in absence of a registration, the Petitioner cannot carry out his business. Therefore, the effect of the said impugned order would entail civil consequences.

¶7In the backdrop of the above, if this Court peruses the order, it is shocking that the Respondent No.4 had cancelled the registration without assigning any reason. This clearly shows a total non-application of mind. Accordingly, this Court therefore sets aside the said impugned order dated 15.12.2023 thereby restoring the status back to the date on which the Show Cause notice dated

13.11.2023 was issued.

¶8The petitioner is given the liberty to file the reply to the said show cause notice. The said exercise be done within a period of 10 (ten) days from today. The Respondent No.4 shall take due steps in accordance with law.

¶9Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of in terms with the observations and directions made hereinabove.

JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010197382024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5002/2024 PROBIN SAIKIA SON OF DAMBARUDHAR SAIKIA, PROPRIETOR OF M/S DEEP CONSTRUCTION, SABJIBARI, DULIAJAN DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN- 786602 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD GUWAHATI- 781001 3:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DIBRUGARH DIVISION DIBRUGARH PIN- 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX TINSUKIA ZONE NAHARKATIA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. A Khanikar Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. SC Keyal Page No.# 2/4 Standing Counsel, CGST B E F O R E HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH