FACTS OF THE CASE

The Petitioner, Sakshi Goyal, Proprietor of M/s Parshavnath Industries, engaged in the manufacture of ghee, held GST registration (GSTIN: 07BHEPG8680C1ZE) with principal place of business in Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh and residential address in Delhi.
A show cause notice dated 13th September, 2024 was issued to her by the GST authorities, followed by an impugned order dated 27th September, 2024 retrospectively canceling her GST registration.

Prior to the show cause notice, the Petitioner filed a modification application dated 30th August, 2024 seeking amendment of her business address, which was allowed on 9th October, 2024 — after the impugned cancellation order. The Petitioner contended that the GST department did not consider this amendment when issuing its order.

ISSUES INVOLVED

  1. Whether the Respondent authorities erred in cancelling the Petitioner’s GST registration retrospectively, without considering the amended business address approved on 9th October, 2024.
  2. Whether procedural fairness and lawful adjudication were observed in issuing the show cause notice and the impugned order.

PETITIONER’S ARGUMENTS

  • The GST registration cancellation was unjustly made retrospectively without due regard to the Petitioner’s application to amend her business address which was approved on 9th October, 2024.
  • The show cause notice and the impugned order did not take the amended address into account; therefore, the basis of the notice was defective.
  • The Petitioner should be allowed to file a reply to the show cause notice and be afforded a fresh hearing. 

RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENTS

  • The GST Department stated an ongoing Input Tax Credit (ITC) investigation involving the Petitioner’s related entities (including agencies in Jammu & Kashmir and Indore) may justify the actions, including retrospective cancellation of registration.
  • The Show Cause Notice was issued from an earlier registered address, and due to frequent address changes by the Petitioner, the authorities contended it may have been issued at an incorrect address.
  • The Department defended its procedural approach but did not dispute the address amendment’s legal effect. 

COURT ORDER / FINDINGS

The High Court disposed of the petition with detailed directions:

  1. The Petitioner was permitted to file a reply to the show cause notice dated 13th September, 2024 by 15th December, 2025.
  2. The GST Department must physically re-inspect the Petitioner’s amended premises to obtain a fresh inspection report.
  3. The Petitioner must be granted a personal hearing, and the show cause notice must be adjudicated in accordance with law.
  4. The Petitioner is mandated to cooperate in the ongoing ITC investigation; any action arising from allegations of fraudulent ITC availment shall be taken as per statutory provisions. 

IMPORTANT CLARIFICATIONS FROM COURT

  • The cancellation was not upheld outright; instead, the Court directed a fresh, lawful process.
  • The Court emphasized that the amended address must be considered in all future proceedings.
  • Procedural fairness in GST adjudication and reasonable opportunity to be heard are essential in revenue matters. 

SECTIONS / LEGAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED

  • Articles 226 & 227 – Constitution of India (Writ jurisdiction of High Court).
  • Analysis of procedures under CGST/GST Laws applicable to registration cancellation and show cause notices (implicitly arising in proceedings).

Link to download the order -  https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/75412112025CW163332025_125309.pdf 

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.