Case Law Details
Suman Overseas Vs U.O.I (Allahabad High Court)
The writ petition challenged the validity of notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017 and the U.P. GST Act, 2017 to the extent they extended the time limit for passing orders for Financial Year 2018–19. The petitioner also questioned the ratification of the central notification by the GST Council and sought quashing of scrutiny-related orders passed under Section 61, alleging they were time-barred under Section 73, without jurisdiction, arbitrary, non-speaking, and violative of constitutional provisions.
On examination of the record, the Court noted that the petitioner’s GST registration had been cancelled on 30.11.2018. Subsequently, a show cause notice dated 25.12.2023 was issued only through the GST portal and not served by any other mode. The Court observed that after cancellation of registration, service of notice ought to have been effected through e-mail or registered post. Since this was not done, the Court held that the principles of natural justice were violated.
Accordingly, the impugned orders were quashed and set aside. The authorities were directed to grant the petitioner an opportunity to file a reply, and thereafter to provide an opportunity of hearing. With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
1. In the present case the writ petitioner makes the following prayers:-
“A-Issue appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax [5.0 No. 5483(E)/F.NO.CBIC-20013/7/2021- GST] dated 28.12.2023 (Annexure-1) issued by the respondent no. 3 under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Notification No. 13/XI-2-24-9(47)/17.T.C.250-U.P.Act-1-2017-Order- (311)-2024 dated 07.02.2024 (Annexure-2) issued by respondent no. 4 under Section 168A of the U.P Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, to the extent they extend time period for passing order for F.Y 2018-19, as ultra-vires Section 168A, arbitrary, unreasonable, colourable and violative of Article 14, 265 & 279A of the Constitution;
B-Issue appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the ratification of Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax [5.0 No. 5483(E)/F.NO.CBIC-20013/7/2021- GST] dated 28.12.2023 by respondent no. 3 GST Council in its 53rd meeting held on 22.06.2024, as ultra-vires Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017 and also arbitrary and hence violative of Article 14 of the Constitution;
C-Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24.04.2024 (Annexure-5) pertaining to a scrutiny of return under section 61 for the Financial Year 2017-18 but projecting it for the period 2018-19, as the same was even otherwise barred by limitation, having been passed after the expiry of period specified under Section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act(s), 2017, which is also otherwise without jurisdiction, arbitrary, non-speaking and unreasoned;
E. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 18/08/2025 passed by respondent no. 5 in furtherance to an illegal order pertaining to a scrutiny of return under section 61 for the Financial Year 2017-18 but projecting it for the period 2018-19, as the same was even otherwise barred by limitation, having been passed after the expiry of period specified under Section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act(s), 2017, which is also otherwise without jurisdiction, arbitrary, non-speaking and unreasoned. (Annexure-4)
2. Upon perusal of the documents, it appears that the registration of the petitioner was cancelled on 30.11.2018 and the present show cause notice was issued on 25.12.2023. The above show cause notice was only issued on the portal and was not issued by any other means to the petitioner.
3. In light of the same, we are of the view that after cancellation of the registration, the petitioner should have been served by way of E-Mail or by registered post. As the same was not done, we are of the view that the principles of natural justice has been violated. The impugned orders are accordingly quashed and set aside with the direction to the authorities to grant benefit to the petitioner to file a reply.
4. Opportunity of hearing must also be granted to the petitioner once the said reply is filed.
5. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Author Bio
