The Calcutta High Court had refused to reinstate GST registration on the ground that the assessee was afforded multiple opportunities to present its case but failed to produce satisfactory explanations or evidence to justify the continuation of its GST registration.
The bench of Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj has observed that the petitioner’s reliance on photographic evidence to dispute the verification report lacks substantive weight. Therefore, the department’s actions, including the cancellation of GST registration and rejection of revocation applications, were based on sound legal principles and documentary evidence.
The petitioner/assessee became a registered dealer under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, effective from July 1, 2017 and carried out business activities during the financial year 2017-18, procuring 11,876 MT of sugar and selling the entire stock by March 2018. However, due to significant financial losses in the financial year 2018-19, the petitioner ceased business operations in the State of West Bengal. Despite the absence of transactions, the petitioner diligently filed nil returns under the GST Act up to November 2021 and annual returns up to the financial year 2019-20.
On November 15, 2021, the department issued a show-cause notice alleging that the petitioner had fraudulently obtained registration through suppression of facts or wilful misstatement, without presenting any evidence to substantiate the claims. The petitioner responded to the notice and sought additional time for compliance, citing challenges posed by the ongoing COVID- 19 pandemic. However, the department mechanically cancelled the petitioner’s GST registration with retrospective effect from July 1, 2017.
Aggrieved by the cancellation, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act along with an application for condonation of delay of 116 days. However, the appellate authority rejected both the appeal and the application without adequately addressing the petitioner’s grounds.
The department submits that the Deputy Commissioner, Jorasanko & Jorabagan Charge, under the Directorate of Commercial Taxes, Government of West Bengal being the competent officer who conducted the verification as per the direction of the Court submits that the aforementioned writ petition was taken up for consideration on January 17, 2025, when this Court direct the competent officer, to visit the principal place of business and submit a fresh verification report.
The court held that writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed as the petitioner’s contention regarding the retrospective cancellation of GST registration on the grounds of an unsubstantiated show- cause notice lacks sufficient legal basis. The competent authority exercised its jurisdiction within the framework of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and followed due process in issuing the cancellation order. Moreover, the respondent authority’s rejection of the petitioner’s appeal and condonation of delay application does not demonstrate any procedural irregularity or violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner was afforded multiple opportunities to present its case but failed to produce satisfactory explanations or evidence to justify the continuation of its GST registration.
Case Details
Case Title: ED & F Man Commodities India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner, State Tax & Ors.
Case No.: W.P.A 10537 of 2024
Date: 07.04.2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Mr. Somak Basu, Mr. Nilanjan Bhttacharya
Counsel For Respondent: Mr. A. Ray, Mr. Md. T.M. Siddiqui, Mr. T. Chakraborty, Mr. S. Sanyal
Read More: Kerala High Court Quashes Tax and Penalty Order For Wrongful IGST Credit Availment
