GLO Interio Vs Sales Tax Officer (Delhi High Court)
The Delhi High Court examined the legality of a retrospective cancellation of GST registration arising from a show cause notice (SCN) that allegedly failed to specify the relevant default period and dues. The petitioner had been granted GST registration on 5 June 2019 and later claimed to have discontinued business, following which a voluntary cancellation application was made under Section 29 of the GST Act. Subsequently, an SCN dated 14 January 2021 was issued, alleging failure to pay tax, interest, or penalty beyond three months from the due date and calling upon the petitioner to explain why the registration should not be cancelled. No reply was submitted to this SCN, and an order was passed cancelling the registration retrospectively from the date of registration itself, i.e., 5 June 2019.
Aggrieved by the retrospective cancellation, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, contending inter alia that the SCN might not have been served and that it was vague. The appeal, however, was dismissed as time-barred through a cryptic order dated 26 September 2025, leading to the present writ petition before the Delhi High Court.
Before the Court, the petitioner raised two principal contentions. First, it was argued that the SCN was vague and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, as it neither specified the period for which GST dues were allegedly unpaid nor indicated whether cancellation was proposed prospectively or retrospectively. The petitioner contended that such vagueness deprived him of a meaningful opportunity to respond. Second, it was argued that the appellate order dismissing the appeal as time-barred was non-speaking and failed to address the merits.
