Radhey Traders Vs Superintendent CGST (Uttarakhand High Court)
Summary: The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the writ petition filed by M/S Shri Radhey Traders and quashed the order dated 29.05.2025 cancelling its GST registration, as well as the appellate order dated 09.07.2026 dismissing its appeal as time-barred. The cancellation order invoked Section 29(2)(e) on the ground that registration had been obtained by fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice dated 23.04.2025 merely repeated those statutory expressions without disclosing the facts on which the department had formed that view, leaving the petitioner unable to respond effectively. Revenue counsel accepted that neither the show cause notice nor the impugned orders supplied any details beyond the bare allegation of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression. The Court held that, in the absence of factual particulars explaining how fraud, misstatement or suppression had occurred, the impugned orders could not be sustained. It accordingly quashed both orders, allowed the writ petition, disposed of all pending applications and left the department at liberty to proceed afresh strictly in accordance with law.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
1. The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 29.05.2025, by which the registration of the petitioner-firm has been cancelled for the following reason :-
“1. Section 29(2)(e)-registration obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.”
2. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 09.07.2026, by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner-firm has been dismissed on the ground that it was filed beyond the limitation prescribed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the show cause notice dated 23.04.2025 issued to the petitioner-firm before cancellation of the GST registration except for stating that the registration was obtained by fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts does not disclose the facts, on basis of which the department had reached to the said conclusion.
4. The submission is that in case a party alleges fraud, the facts, on basis of which the said allegation has been made, have to be specifically stated. However, in the instant case in absence of any factual foundation, on basis of which the aforesaid allegation was made against the petitioner-firm, the petitioner-firm was not in a position to respond to such a notice.
5. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue accepts that in the show cause notice, as well as in the impugned orders, the only ground stated for cancellation of GST registration is fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, without giving the details thereof.
6. In the absence of any factual details, as to how there was fraud, misstatement or suppression of facts, the impugned orders cannot be sustained and are, hereby, quashed.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. It is left open to the department to proceed afresh strictly in accordance with law.
8. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.
