Order cancelling the registration is set aside solely on the ground that show cause notice has been issued inadvertently by fixing personal hearing on a public holiday on account of Gandhi Jayanthi which error is regretted. Respondent shall issue fresh SCN calling for noticee/writ petitioner's response in accordance with law.
Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Registration – The petitioner challenged the order cancelling the registration of the petitioner dated 14.10.2019. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide proviso to Section 29(2) of Act, a proper officer cannot cancel the registration without giving an Assessee an opportunity of being heard. He did not notice the SCN which was hosted in the portal and therefore, he did not send a reply. The court observed that in the impugned SCN no reasons have been set out and it is not a speaking order. Furthermore, a personal hearing on 02.10.2019 has been given and the same was a public holiday. The counsel for petitioner submitted that he did not resort to revocation of the cancellation under Section 30 as the time stipulated for revocation had elapsed and therefore, he filed an appeal under Section 107, which was disposed on 03.05.2021 solely on the ground of limitation without expressing any opinion or going into the merits of the matter. The Revenue counsel submitted that SCN dated 25.09.2019 has been issued with an inadvertent error as it is a computer generated SCN and has inadvertently fixed personal hearing on 02.10.2019 (at 11.00 a.m.) which is a public holiday. Further, no personal hearing was held on 02.10.2019 or thereafter.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned order dated 14.10.2019 and set aside the SCN dated 25.09.2019. Directed the respondent to issue fresh SCN.
Order cancelling the registration is set aside solely on the ground that show cause notice has been issued inadvertently by fixing personal hearing on a public holiday on account of Gandhi Jayanthi which error is regretted. Respondent shall issue fresh SCN calling for noticee/writ petitioner's response in accordance with law.
Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Registration – The petitioner challenged the order cancelling the registration of the petitioner dated 14.10.2019. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide proviso to Section 29(2) of Act, a proper officer cannot cancel the registration without giving an Assessee an opportunity of being heard. He did not notice the SCN which was hosted in the portal and therefore, he did not send a reply. The court observed that in the impugned SCN no reasons have been set out and it is not a speaking order. Furthermore, a personal hearing on 02.10.2019 has been given and the same was a public holiday. The counsel for petitioner submitted that he did not resort to revocation of the cancellation under Section 30 as the time stipulated for revocation had elapsed and therefore, he filed an appeal under Section 107, which was disposed on 03.05.2021 solely on the ground of limitation without expressing any opinion or going into the merits of the matter. The Revenue counsel submitted that SCN dated 25.09.2019 has been issued with an inadvertent error as it is a computer generated SCN and has inadvertently fixed personal hearing on 02.10.2019 (at 11.00 a.m.) which is a public holiday. Further, no personal hearing was held on 02.10.2019 or thereafter.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned order dated 14.10.2019 and set aside the SCN dated 25.09.2019. Directed the respondent to issue fresh SCN.