Aditi Agri Junction Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court)
In the case of Aditi Agri Junction vs. State of U.P., the petitioner challenged the cancellation of its GST registration and the dismissal of its appeal as time-barred. The issue began with a show cause notice dated 29.03.2023, stating that the petitioner, a composition taxpayer, had not filed returns for three consecutive tax periods. The petitioner was directed to respond within seven working days and appear for a hearing on 12.04.2023. However, no reply was filed, leading to an order on 10.05.2023 canceling the GST registration under Section 29(2)(b) of the CGST Act. An appeal against this order was dismissed on 06.03.2024 for exceeding the limitation period. The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was never received and that the authorities failed to follow procedural requirements, such as fixing separate dates for reply submission and personal hearing. Additionally, the petitioner contended that the cancellation order was based on grounds not explicitly mentioned in the notice.
The High Court found procedural lapses in the issuance of the show cause notice, particularly the failure to provide distinct dates for filing a reply and for a hearing, which violated principles of natural justice. The court referenced its earlier ruling in Mahaveer Trading Company vs. Deputy Commissioner State Tax, where a similar procedural issue led to the quashing of a cancellation order. Applying the same reasoning, the court set aside the cancellation order and the appeal dismissal. The case was remanded to the Assessing Authority for reconsideration, with instructions to follow due process, provide a fair hearing, and consider any returns filed by the petitioner before making a fresh decision. This ruling emphasizes the importance of adhering to procedural safeguards in GST registration cancellations.
