Maa Construction And Supplier Company Vs State of U.P (Allahabad High Court)
The Allahabad High Court heard a petition filed by Maa Construction And Supplier Company challenging the cancellation of its GST registration under Section 29(2)(d) of the GST Act. The petitioner also contested the appellate order dismissing its appeal as beyond the limitation period. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the registration cancellation was ex-parte, as no opportunity of hearing had been granted before the order. It was argued that the powers under Section 29(2) are discretionary and cannot be exercised mechanically, and the impugned order lacked reasoning, rendering it non-sustainable.
The Additional Chief Standing Counsel argued that an opportunity of hearing had been granted but not availed by the petitioner, and therefore the cancellation order could not be said to have been passed without notice. Upon review, the Court observed that the issue had been considered in prior cases, including M/s Chandra Sain vs Union of India and Ors. and Om Prakash Mishra v. State of U.P. & Ors. In these precedents, the Court emphasized that quasi-judicial orders adversely affecting a party’s rights must demonstrate the application of mind and provide reasons. Orders lacking reasons violate principles under Article 14 of the Constitution, and administrative or quasi-judicial authorities are obliged to articulate their rationale.
