B.C.Mohankumar Vs Superintendent of Central Goods & Service Tax (Madras High Court)
Order for non-granting GST registration must be a speaking order
The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the matter of M/s B.C. Mohan Kumar v Superintendent of Central Goods & Service Tax [W.P. No. 13272 and WMP. Nos. 12569 & 12571 dated June 16, 2022] has held that the order for cancelling the GST registration must be a speaking order and the discretion provided to the department in such cases shall not be used blatantly to violate the principles of natural justice.
Facts:
M/s B.C. Mohan Kumar (“the Petitioner”) had made an application seeking registration in accordance with Section 22 read with Section 25 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (“the CGST Act”). The registration was in respect of a rice mandi, for which the application is duly acknowledged, and physical verification was also undertaken. A notice was issued by the Superintendent of Central Goods & Service Tax (“the Respondent”) for seeking clarification as the application did not enclose the details of principal place of business of the Petitioner, which was duly responded by the Petitioner by uploading a copy of rental deed as his principal place of business. An order (“the impugned order”) was passed rejecting the application without assigning any reasons for the rejection. The Petitioner assails the impugned order is cryptic and entirely non-speaking, whereas, as per the Respondent, the word ‘may’ in Rule 9(4) of the CGST Act grants discretion to the authority for assigning reasons.
Issue:
