Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Rafik Mohammad, was issued a show cause notice dated 12.02.2026 asking why his GST registration should not be cancelled. He filed a written response to that notice. However, the final order dated 18.03.2026, cancelling his GST registration, recorded that no written response had been filed by him at all. During the hearing, counsel for the respondents (CBIC) fairly conceded that a written response had in fact been filed by the petitioner but had been inadvertently overlooked by the officer while passing the cancellation order.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the cancellation order was sustainable when it wrongly recorded that no response to the show cause notice had been filed, despite one actually being on record.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Since the petitioner had in fact filed a written response to the show cause notice, the cancellation order's factual premise -- that no response was filed -- rendered it unsustainable as passed without application of mind.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Counsel for the respondents fairly conceded that a written response had indeed been filed on 12.02.2026 but was inadvertently overlooked by the officer at the time the cancellation order was passed on 18.03.2026.

Court Order / Findings

  • Accepting the respondents' own concession, the Court held that the cancellation order dated 18.03.2026 was passed without application of mind and quashed it.
  • Liberty was granted to the respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner in accordance with law -- meaning the department could re-examine the show cause notice and the petitioner's actual response and pass a fresh, properly considered order.
  • The petition was allowed with no costs.

Important Clarification

This order does not restore the petitioner's GST registration on the merits of the cancellation grounds -- it only sets aside the specific order because it was passed while overlooking the petitioner's actual reply. The department remains free to pass a fresh cancellation order after properly considering that reply, so the underlying question of whether cancellation is justified is still open.

Sections Involved

  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – provisions governing cancellation of registration on show cause notice (Section 29)

Decision – In Favour of

Petitioner (Rafik Mohammad), procedurally – the cancellation order was quashed for want of application of mind, with liberty to the department to proceed afresh.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Case Number: CWP-11594-2026 (O&M)
Coram: Justice Deepak Sibal and Justice Lapita Banerji
Date of Order: 21 April 2026

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.