The application for revocation of cancellation of registration has been wrongly rejected. The manner in which the show cause notice has been issued is wholly unacceptable as it does not record any shortcoming on the part of the assessee. It is not conceivable as to what was required in the show cause notice.
Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Revocation of Cancellation of Registration ---The petitioner was served SCN dated 21.11.2019 proposing to cancel the registration certificate on the ground that he has failed to file the return for a continuous period of six months. Thereafter, an ex-parte order was passed on 30.11.2019 cancelling the registration. The petitioner filed an application on 19.12.2019 for revocation of cancellation of registration on the ground that the petitioner had submitted all the pending returns under GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 and, thus, the entire tax liability stood clear with the late fees. Thereafter, the respondent issued a SCN on 29.12.2019 to show cause without mentioning any ground. The court observed that SCN was completely vague and did not even point out as to what ground the reply was proposed to be sought, despite this, the respondent on 30.1.2020, rejected the application for revocation of registration on the ground that the tax payer has simply stated that interest has been paid without providing any details as to amount or details of Challan/DRC-03. The petitioner preferred an appeal wherein it was submitted that the application for revocation of cancellation of registration has been wrongly rejected despite of the Challan present on the portal. The petitioner once again filed all the requisite documents evidencing the filing of returns as well as the tax and late fees. The Appellate Authority on 06.07.2020 dismissed the appeal. The respondents submitted before the court that the tax payer has filed GSTR-3B upto November 2019 and further there are no dues pending towards tax, late fee, interest upto November 2019. The court observed that SCN clearly highlights the fact that serious quasi-adjudicatory functionaries are being discharged by persons who do not have a legally trained mind and are entrusted in discharging functions affecting huge revenues.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the petition and set aside the orders dated 30.11.2019 and 06.07.2020 with a direction to allow the application for revocation of registration filed by the petitioner. Further imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid to the petitioner within 30 days by the respondent no. 2 from his own salary.