Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017--- Cancellation of Registration —- The petitioner challenged an order dated 28.12.2020, whereby the petitioner’s registration was cancelled. The counsel for the respondent stated that the petitioner had not filed any response to the SCN. The court observed that they are unable to accept that the petitioner has not filed a response to the SCN, as the order expressly records that this has reference to your reply dated 24/12/2020. Although the impugned order refers to the petitioner’s response to the Show Cause Notice, it does not indicate as to the contents thereof or reflects any discussion in respect of the petitioner’s explanation. There is no dispute that the petitioner has filed its returns, albeit belatedly, and has also paid the tax and penalty in accordance with the Act. The Court relied upon the decision of the Madras High Court in TVL. Suguna Cutpiece Center v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), SALEM and further observed that the impugned order dated 28.12.2020, cancelling the petitioner’s registration is unsustainable as it does not consider the petitioner’s response to the Show Cause Notice.

Held that:- The Hon’ble Court set aside the impugned order dated 28.12.2020 and directed the respondent to restore the petitioner’s Registration.