Facts of the Case

Saurabh Sahu's GST registration under the MGST Act was cancelled by an order dated 07.07.2023, preceded by a show cause notice dated 12.06.2023 in Form GST REG-17, which cited only Section 29(2)(e) (fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts) without any particulars, and did not specify the date/time of the personal hearing on non-appearance at which the matter would be decided ex parte. When challenged, the Department claimed a detailed 'attachment' had accompanied the notice, which it alleged the petitioner had suppressed; the petitioner demonstrated via portal screenshots that no such attachment had ever been served, and the Department conceded a possible technical glitch. The writ was filed roughly 21 months after the cancellation order.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a show cause notice for cancellation of GST registration that merely cites Section 29(2)(e) without stating the particulars of the alleged fraud/misstatement/suppression satisfies principles of natural justice.
  2. Whether delay of about 21 months in approaching the writ court, and the availability of alternate statutory remedies (revocation application/appeal), bar relief.
  3. Whether a gross breach of natural justice is an exception to the rule of relegating a petitioner to alternate remedies.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The show cause notice was entirely vague and bereft of particulars, so the petitioner could not have filed any effective reply or known the precise charge against him.
  • Any action based on such a vague notice is a product of a natural justice violation and cannot be sustained.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Produced what it claimed was an attachment to the show cause notice containing the detailed allegations, contending the petitioner had suppressed this document from the writ record.
  • Alternatively urged that the petition, filed roughly 21 months after the cancellation order and without exhausting the revocation/appeal remedies, should not be entertained on grounds of delay and alternate remedy.

Court Order / Findings

  • Held that merely quoting a section and alleging fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression is never enough — the noticee must be told what the alleged fraud, misstatement or suppression actually was, so as to respond effectively.
  • Found that, on the petitioner producing portal screenshots showing no such attachment was ever served, and the Department conceding a possible technical glitch, the show cause notice actually served remained completely vague; on this short ground alone, the cancellation order was liable to be set aside.
  • Held that delay is not the same as laches, which requires crystallised third-party rights; the petitioner, having suffered during the delay period and gained nothing from it, could not be non-suited on that ground alone.
  • Held that in cases of a gross breach of natural justice, petitioners should not be relegated to alternate remedies, since the court's concern is the fairness of the decision-making process, not merely the final outcome — an established exception to the rule against entertaining petitions where alternate remedies exist.
  • Followed its own recent decision in Manek Steel LLP v. Union of India (order dated 30.06.2025) on materially identical facts, allowed the petition, and set aside the cancellation order dated 07.07.2023, while granting the Department liberty to issue a fresh, particularised show cause notice and decide it in accordance with law, keeping all contentions on merits open.

Important Clarification

  • A show-cause notice for cancellation of GST registration alleging fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression under Section 29(2)(e) must state the actual particulars of the allegation; merely reciting the statutory language is 'patent vagueness' amounting to a breach of natural justice, and is not cured by the department belatedly producing an unserved attachment. Such a gross natural justice breach is a recognised exception to the rule of relegating petitioners to statutory alternate remedies, and marginal or even substantial delay in approaching the writ court will not defeat relief absent crystallised third-party rights.

Sections Involved

  • Section 29(2)(e), CGST/MGST Act, 2017 — cancellation of registration for fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.
  • Form GST REG-17 — show cause notice for cancellation of registration.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the Assessee (procedural; Department at liberty to reissue a proper show cause notice).

Case Details

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction; WRIT PETITION NO. 8537 OF 2025; Coram: Justice M.S. Sonak & Justice Jitendra Jain; Order dated 01.07.2025.

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.