Case Details: Swapnil Prakash Bhogle Versus Union of India (2025) 33 Centax 163 (Bom.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ
- Shri Raja G. Valechha for the Petitioner
- S/Shri Karan Adik, Ms Sangeeta Yadav, Umesh Gupta & Parimal Wagh for the Respondent
Facts of the Case
The petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled pursuant to a show cause notice dated 18 August 2023, followed by an order dated 31 August 2023. The petitioner submitted that the notice was vague as it only referred to “non-compliance of specified provisions” without mentioning any particular provision of the Act or Rules. Despite filing a reply regarding his place of business, the cancellation order did not consider the same and contained no reasons. The petitioner’s application for revocation of cancellation was also rejected on 8 December 2023, with the authority merely stating that valid address proof had not been submitted. It was urged that the entire action was arbitrary, non-speaking, and in gross violation of natural justice.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the SCN was “as vague as vagueness can be” and such a general statement could not amount to a valid show cause notice. The cancellation order, being non-speaking and unreasoned, failed to show consideration of the reply. The rejection of revocation was also mechanical and without reasons. Accordingly, the SCN, cancellation order and rejection order were quashed and the petitioner’s registration declared revived. However, liberty was reserved to the Department to issue a fresh notice with proper particulars and pass a reasoned order after considering the petitioner’s reply.
