Case Law Details
Dayamay Enterprise Vs State of Tripura (Tripura High Court)
The impugned notice has been issued only for cancellation of registration, that too without citing any particular reason. The reason stated is picked up from the statute itself namely, non-compliance of any specified provisions of GST Act or the Rules made thereunder. Without specifying which provisions of the Act or the Rules and in what manner the petitioner has approached, granting hearing to the petitioner would be an empty formality. This apart, admittedly, so far no order cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration has been passed. If that be so, without resorting to the power of suspending the registration, if there is any, the respondent surely cannot block the petitioner’s GST account on the official portal. Any such action would prevent the petitioner from carrying on his business in lawful manner. Such an action would have the effect of suspension of the petitioner’s registration.
Under the circumstances, impugned show cause notice dated 16th December 2020 is quashed on the ground of being vague and imprecise. Further, the respondents are directed to unblock the petitioner’s GST account on its official portal. This is without prejudice to the steps that the department make take for recovery of its dues in accordance with law or for breach any of the requirements under the law as the rules and regulations permit.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
Petitioner has challenged a communication dated 16th December 2020, issued by the Superintendent of Taxes calling upon the petitioner to appear for personal hearing why the petitioner’s registration under GST Act not be cancelled. The petitioner has also questioned the action of the respondents in blocking the petitioner’s registration on the portal of the department.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
