The Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad vide its order dated 05 March 2022 in the matter of Apparent Marketing Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. and others in Writ Tax No. 348 of 2021 held that the show cause issued without mentioning the specific charge is vague and defective. Further the orders proceeded to be passed on the basis of such defective show cause notice without affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee are also vague and against the principles of natural justice, thus not sustainable.
The assessee preferred the Writ assailing the order dated 12.02.2021 passed by the Appellate Authority in Appeal No. GST/994/2022, order dated 21.08.2020 and the order dated 13.08.2020 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Ghaziabad.
- The assessee is trading in Pan Masala and Tobacco and was granted registration under the UP GST Act, 2017 w.e.f. 17.08.2017, the assessee is duly depositing tax and filing its returns on time.
- On 12.2017 a survey was conducted at the business premise of the assessee and the premises were found closed. Thereafter another survey was conducted on 16.12.2018 and no adverse material was discovered during the survey proceedings.
- That besides the above two surveys the assessee was also cooperating with the department in certain proceedings against a third party in which it was summoned under Section 70.
- The assessee received a notice under Section 29 through eportal of revenue department on 07.2020 cancelling its registration stating the only reason i.e. ‘Your firm was found bogus in inspection of SIB. Information received from headquarter’., and the assessee was required to file the reply within seven days and to appear before the authority on 24.07.2020.
- The assessee neither filed a reply to the notice and nor appeared before the authority and no order was passed by the authority on the day of hearing i.e., 07.2020.
- Later on, the authority without issuing a further notice to the assessee passed an ex-parte order dated 08.2020 and cancelled the registration of the assessee without stating any further reason. The order states i.e.,’ No reply about SCN that your firm was found bogus in inspection of SIB. Information received from headquarter.’
- The assessee against the aforesaid order dated 08.2020 filed an application for revocation under Section 30. In response, the assessee received a notice dated 21.08.2020 requiring it to furnish a reply within seven days and to appear on the appointed date or time, however no date and time was mentioned on the notice.
- The assessee duly uploaded its reply on the same day i.e., 08.2020 and on the same day without providing any personal hearing, the respondent authority passed the order rejecting the application for revocation of cancellation of registration stating the same reason and the reply filed being not found satisfactory.
- That aggrieved of the aforesaid order dated 08.2020, the assessee filed an appeal and the Appellant authority also dismissed the appeal relying on the survey report dated 15.12.2017. To read more subscribe today: www.taxo.online