Boldridge Private Limited Vs Union of India And Ors (Guwahati High Court)
The petitioner challenged the cancellation of its GST registration under the CGST Act, 2017, contending that the cancellation order dated 16.04.2024, passed pursuant to a show cause notice dated 12.03.2024, was arbitrary, non-speaking and passed without application of mind. The petitioner submitted that it could not file a reply to the show cause notice due to miscommunication with its tax consultant and was unable to seek revocation or file an appeal within the prescribed limitation. It also contended that the cancellation order issued in Form GST REG-19 did not assign any reasons for cancellation.
The respondents submitted that the petitioner had failed to furnish GST returns for a continuous period exceeding six months and had neither sought revocation nor preferred a statutory appeal within time.
The High Court examined Section 29(2)(c), Section 39 of the CGST Act and Rules 21, 21A and 22 of the CGST Rules. It noted that while the law empowers the Proper Officer to cancel registration for non-filing of returns for the prescribed period, the statutory procedure under Rule 22 requires issuance of a show cause notice in Form GST REG-17, consideration of the reply, and, where cancellation is warranted, a reasoned order in Form GST REG-19. If the reply is satisfactory or the registered person furnishes all pending returns and pays the tax, interest and late fee, proceedings are to be dropped by issuing Form GST REG-20.
