Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a taxpayer holding GST registration No. 37A1AP15009B1ZW, challenged the cancellation of its registration by the 4th respondent vide proceedings dated 07.07.2023, and the subsequent rejection of its revocation application by the 5th respondent vide order dated 04.10.2023. A show-cause notice had been issued on 26.06.2023, and the cancellation order dated 07.07.2023 recorded that no reply had been filed within time (the petitioner's reply was in fact filed only on 07.07.2023 itself, the date of the cancellation order). On the petitioner's subsequent revocation application, a notice dated 04.08.2023 proposed rejection on the ground that, as per a field-visit report, no business was found running at the registered address. The petitioner replied on 04.09.2023, explaining that the business was in fact being run at the registered address, that a change of mobile number had disrupted communication, and that photographs supported his claim. The revocation application was nonetheless rejected on 04.10.2023 on the basis of the field-visit finding.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration and the rejection of the revocation application, both founded on a field-inspection report, could be interfered with in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
  2. Whether the petitioner ought to be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy available under the GST Act.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner was in fact running business at the registered address, and photographs were available to demonstrate this.
  • The change of the petitioner's mobile number, which had gone unreported, was the reason the field-verification communication and process could not be responded to in time, and this explanation was not considered in its proper perspective by the authorities.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal under the GST Act which ought to be availed instead of invoking writ jurisdiction.
  • Physical verification carried out on 26.06.2023 found no business running at the registered address, and it was only after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, based on this field-visit report, that the cancellation and subsequent rejection of revocation were passed by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that whether the petitioner was carrying on business at the registered address was a pure question of fact, and the finding recorded in both the cancellation order and the rejection of revocation — based on the field-inspection report — could not be re-appraised in a writ petition under Article 226.
  • If the petitioner had evidence to establish that the business was indeed being run at the registered address, the appropriate forum to reappraise that evidence was the statutory appellate authority, not the writ court.
  • The Court declined to entertain the writ petition and dismissed it, leaving the petitioner free to avail the statutory remedy of appeal, with no order as to costs.

Important Clarification

A challenge to GST registration cancellation or revocation-rejection that turns on disputed factual findings from a field-verification report is not amenable to writ jurisdiction; such factual disputes must be agitated through the statutory appellate mechanism under the GST Act, which alone is equipped to reappraise evidence.

Sections Involved

  • Central/State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – provides the statutory appellate remedy against orders of cancellation and rejection of revocation of registration.
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India – the writ jurisdiction invoked, held inappropriate for resolving the disputed factual question.

Decision – In Favour of

The writ petition was dismissed, effectively leaving the cancellation and revocation-rejection orders undisturbed for the present — a decision in favour of the Department, though without a final merits ruling, since the petitioner was left free to pursue the statutory appeal.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh
  • Case Number: Writ Petition No. 28853 of 2023
  • Coram: Hon'ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Hon'ble Sri Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu
  • Date of Order: 08 November 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.