Jay Jagannath Filling Station Vs Commissioner of Sales Tax (CT & GST) and another (Orissa High Court)
Summary: GST registration cannot be cancelled without proper verification of supporting evidence. The Orissa High Court, in M/s. Jay Jagannath Filling Station v. Commissioner of Sales Tax (CT & GST) and Anr. [W.P. (C) No. 9856 of 2025, dated April 29, 2025], set aside a GST Registration Cancellation Order because the assessee’s submitted documents demonstrated ongoing business operations at the declared place. The Petitioner, M/s. Jay Jagannath Filling Station, challenged the cancellation, which was based solely on the ground that business was not conducted at the declared place. The Petitioner provided an affidavit, invoices from Indian Oil Corporation, and photographs to prove continuous operations, even alleging that the Respondents visited the premises post-cancellation while the business was still active. The Respondent, conversely, maintained that the cancellation was due to the registering authority finding no business at the stated location. The Court observed that the Petitioner’s documents provided through an additional affidavit confirmed the continued operation of the business from the premises. The Orissa High Court noted that to ascertain the factual aspects, the matter required remittance to the assessing authority for evidence consideration and an inspection regarding the business’s existence at the declared location. The Court directed the Respondent to reconsider the matter, factoring in the documents presented via the additional affidavit. The Petitioner was instructed to appear before the Respondent with the documents for a hearing, and the Respondents were mandated to make a new decision. This judgment aligns with Section 29(2)(c) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, which permits registration cancellation if a business is discontinued or not operated from the declared place, but emphasizes that such power must be exercised with due verification and adherence to natural justice principles. This principle was also upheld in Olive Traders v. Commissioner by the Delhi High Court, where a GST registration cancellation based solely on a “no such firm found” postal remark was set aside due to lack of proper verification.
