|
2022-TIOL-510-HC-AHM-GST
Vahanvati Steels Vs State of Gujarat
GST - Writ applicant seeks setting aside of the order of the State Tax Officer cancelling the registration of petitioner and a direction for restoration or revival of the same - It is the contention of the petitioner that the State Tax Officer has acted in a very high-handed manner and has, therefore, been impleaded in his personal capacity.
Held: In the first round of litigation, the applicant had challenged the ‘vague' show cause notice seeking cancellation of registration and the Special Civil Application No. 6008 of 2022 came to be disposed of by quashing and setting aside the same and observing that a fresh show cause may be issued and which shall contain all necessary information and details for the purpose of effectively responding to the same - It was expected of the respondent no.2 to issue a fresh show-cause notice, however, respondent no.2 proceeded to pass an order cancelling the registration - Writ-applicant preferred an application seeking revocation of the order cancelling the registration and once-again an absurd and vague order came to be passed by the respondent no.2, dated 05.04.2022 - This order apparently contains only “question marks viz. ? symbols ” - Bench is at pains to observe as to on what basis the respondent no.2 could have even put his signature on such an order - Although the applicant is justified in making a submission that respondent no.2 should be proceeded for contempt of court, Bench is not issuing any notice for contempt with a warning to the respondent no.2 that henceforth if this court comes across any such vague order or show-cause notice duly signed by him, then that will be his last day in the office - Order [dated 29.03.2022 & 09.04.2022] cancelling the registration is quashed and set aside - GST registration of the writ-applicant stands restored forthwith - Application disposed of: High Court [para 7, 9, 10, 12, 14]
- Application disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-501-HC-AHM-GST Sainath Metals And Alloys Pvt Ltd Vs UoI
GST - Detention of goods and conveyance - Applicant confirms that the goods and conveyance have been released - However, applicant has a serious grievance to redress - It is submitted that for no good reason, goods and the conveyance were kept under detention for almost a period of 12 days and her client had to pay an amount towards demurrage charges to transporter - The grievance is well founded and is a matter of concern - Since the goods and conveyance have already been released, no further adjudication of application is required: HC
- Writ application disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-500-HC-AHM-GST
Shree Dakornath Scrap Traders Vs State of Gujarat
GST - The applicant is a proprietor of proprietary concern and he has been served with SCN calling upon him to show cause as to why GST registration should not be cancelled - The SCN is bereft on any material particulars or information - In absence of any material particulars and details, it is difficult for any individual to respond to such a vague SCN - Probably what the Authority is trying to convey is that the registration had been obtained by means of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts - If such are the allegations, it is expected of Authority to furnish some details in this regard - The impugned SCN is accordingly quashed and set aside: HC
- Writ application disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2022-TIOL-499-HC-DEL-GST
Fada Trading Pvt Ltd CGST, State of GST Department
GST - The appellate authority via impugned order has dismissed the appeal preferred by petitioner on the ground of limitation - Ordinarily, court would have set aside the impugned order passed by appellate authority and remitted the matter for adjudication on merits, but, in view of the fact that the SCN issued to petitioner is completely deficient in material particulars, no purpose would be served in remanding the matter - The record shows that the order cancelling petitioner's GST registration was passed on 11.12.2019 - The reason the petitioner says that it did not receive any intimation about SCN or the order cancelling petitioner's GST registration, is on account of the fact that the then directors of petitioner, at the relevant time, were at cross purposes - A close perusal of order dated 11.12.2019, whereby petitioner's registration was cancelled, shows that, in fact, there was no demand outstanding qua petitioner - Impugned order dated 26.10.2021, passed by appellate authority and the order cancelling petitioner's GST registration are set aside - Respondents will restore the petitioner's GST registration at the earliest: HC
- Writ petition disposed of: DELHI HIGH COURT |
