Case Law Details
Kpm Enterprises Vs The Commissioner, Delhi Goods And Service Tax & Ors (Delhi High Court)
Appellant submit that alleged inspection by GST department, is in violation of the Rule 25 of 2017 GST Rules as the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity to be present at the site. Further, the respondent has also not uploaded any photographs as required.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly states that although the petitioner ought to have been given an opportunity of hearing before the impugned order cancelling the registration was made and the same may be set aside; he contests that the show-cause notice can be impugned. He submits that even though Rule 25 of the 2017 Rules was not strictly followed the petitioner can be afforded an opportunity to contest the same. The impugned show-cause notice was issued to afford the petitioner an opportunity to present its case as to why the registration should not be cancelled. He submitted that all contentions including that Rule 25 of the 2017 Rules was not followed, would be available to the petitioner.
This Court is unable to accept that the impugned show-cause notice can be sustained, considering that it is clear that it is premised on an alleged inspection that was carried contrary to the 2017 Rules. This court had also enquired whether any photographs were taken at the time of the inspection as required; Mr Satyakam has, after obtaining instructions, responded in the negative.
In view of the above, the petition is allowed and the impugned show-cause notice as well as the impugned order is set aside.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
