The petitioner challenged the rejection of their application for revocation of registration cancellation by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax and the dismissal of their appeal by the Additional Commissioner. The petitioner claimed to be a registered Proprietorship firm operating in accordance with the Act and Rules, but a survey conducted by the department found that the firm was not existing/running from the registered place. The department alleged that the firm was availing fake ITC credit from bogus firms and cancelled their registration. The court found that the department had erred in their decision as being a bogus firm is not a ground for cancellation under Section 29(2) and the appellate order was equally flawed. Therefore, the impugned orders were set aside.
Source Taxguru
Latest Posts in "India"
- GST Success Hinges on Single Tax Rate, Report Recommends Two Slabs and Capped Peak Rate
- Uncertainty in GST Treatment for Ride-Hailing Platforms: Legal Challenges and Implications
- 56th GST Council meeting is scheduled for September 3rd and 4th, 2025
- Eight States Demand GST Rate Cuts Be Tied to Revenue Guarantee and Consumer Benefits
- CII Urges Corporates to Transfer GST Rate Cut Benefits to Consumers Before Festive Season
