Andhra Pradesh High Court allowed the writ petition in the matter of cancellation of GST registration on account of non-filing of GST return as GST Tribunal has not been constituted.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that main activity of the petitioner is imparting education with a non-commercial motive. Running of hostel and supplying food at subsidized price is incidental activity. Accordingly, transaction of supply of food items and beverages to students cannot be treated as sale of goods and hence VAT not applicable.
HC held that Adjudicating order not sustainable where such order was passed without granting an opportunity of personal hearing despite request for grant of such opportunity by assessee.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that when investigation has already been commenced prior to filing of an application before Advance Ruling Authority (ARA), the authority should not admit the application and thereafter issue its ruling. Accordingly, the order is liable to be set aside.
When investigation has already commenced prior to the filing of application, the ARA shall not admit the application as per proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 98, we are of the view that the ARA should not have admitted the application in the instant case and issued its ruling.
Show cause notice as well as order of cancellation of GST registration are dubious enough and failing to divulge the misdeed or fraud allegedly committed by petitioner
held that Revenue Department cannot retain any amount that has been paid as tax as a result of any inadvertent error and error committed by assessee being accidental shall have opportunity to rectify it.
S A Traders Vs GST Officer (Andhra Pradesh High Court) We have gone through the impugned show cause notice and order for cancellation of registration and found force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, for, both show cause notice as well as the order of cancellation of registration are dubious enough and […]
Lupin Ltd. Vs Union of India (Andhra Pradesh High Court) The petitioner challenged ex-parte order refund cannot be rejected merely for non-submission of documents. Relies upon the rule 90(3) and proviso thereto of CGST Rules. The Petitioner challenged ex-parte order rejecting claim for refund on the ground of non-submission of documents. Argues that the circular […]
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the assessment order was passed without furnishing the important documents which are the base of the order to the petitioner enabling the petitioner to make a representation or produce any material contra to the same. Such order is against the principles of natural justice.
