Cancellation of GST Registration based on allegations of fake invoices & claim of ITC without movement of goods: Andhra Pradesh HC Directs Assessee to seek Remedy u/s 30 of GST Act [Read Order]
The court stated that the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy is not available
![Cancellation of GST Registration based on allegations of fake invoices & claim of ITC without movement of goods: Andhra Pradesh HC Directs Assessee to seek Remedy u/s 30 of GST Act [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/GST-GST-registration-GST-registration-cancellation-ITC-Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court-taxscan.jpg "Cancellation of GST Registration based on allegations of fake invoices & claim of ITC without movement of goods: Andhra Pradesh HC Directs Assessee to seek Remedy u/s 30 of GST Act [Read Order]")
Concerning the case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to either file an application under section 30 of the GST ( Goods and Service Tax ) Act for revocation of cancellation, or to challenge the order by filing an appeal and can seek remedy either within 15 days. A.T.Traders-AP, the petitioner/assessee, is engaged in the business...
Concerning the case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to either file an application under section 30 of the GST ( Goods and Service Tax ) Act for revocation of cancellation, or to challenge the order by filing an appeal and can seek remedy either within 15 days.
A.T.Traders-AP, the petitioner/assessee, is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of iron scrap. After availing ITC ( Input Tax Credit ),the petitioner had regularly paid monthly returns and made tax payments as per GST Act,2017.
A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 05.07.2023 under section 29 of SGST ( State Goods And Service Tax ) Act read with Rule 21 of CGST ( Central Goods And Service Tax ) Rules. 2017 by the 1st respondent.The proposal to cancel the petitioner's registration is based on the alleged ground that their suppliers availed ITC without actually receiving the goods and passed on this credit to the petitioner without supplying the goods. The first respondent relied on alleged reports from GST authorities about the petitioner's suppliers.
The petitioner was not given these reports, despite the legal obligation to provide all incriminating material with the show cause notice and could not respond effectively. Without considering all the aspects the 1st respondent canceled the registration on invalid grounds and for the reasons not stated in the show cause notice. The petitioner contented that it is clearly the violation of principles of natural justice. Due to improper advice, the petitioner couldn't file a Section 30 petition under the GST Act, 2017 for revocation of registration, thus leading to the writ petition.
A division bench of Justice, U.Durga Prasad Rao and A V Ravindra Babu, held that the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy is not available and relied upon the decision made in the case of Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of TradeMarks, Mumbai. Therefore, directed the petitioner to file an application under section 30 of the GST Act for revocation of cancellation, or to challenge the impugned order by filing an appeal and thus dismissed the writ petition.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
