Image
Case Details: Tvl. Sri Balajee Udyog vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Broadway Assessment Circle, Chennai (2026) 39 Centax 348 (Mad.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- C. Saravanan, J.
- Mrs R. Hemalatha & Shri Venkatakrishnan A.M., for the Petitioner.
- Ms Amirtha Poonkodi Dinakaran, Government Adv., for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The dispute concerned retrospective cancellation of the petitioner’s GST registration on allegations that invoices had been issued without actual supply of goods, input tax credit (ITC) had been misused, and supplier-wise payment details had not been furnished. The cancellation order revoked the registration retrospectively from the date of the grant of registration. On appeal, a site visit was conducted, which recorded that the petitioner and another registered entity were operating from the same principal place of business, with no additional premises available, and that the premises were found locked, making segregation of stock impracticable. The appellate authority further observed that the claim of substantial ITC was inconsistent with the transport details furnished and consequently sustained the cancellation of registration. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that on the date of the grant of registration to the petitioner, another registration already existed for the same premises. The court observed that the material on record indicated that the transactions were structured to camouflage the petitioner’s transactions and pass on illegitimate ITC through invoices. It was further noted that there was no justification for maintaining dual registrations at the same premises, and the circumstances indicated the absence of legitimate business activity. In these circumstances, the court held that the appellate order affirming cancellation of registration under Section 29 of the CGST Act, read with the Tamil Nadu GST Act, required no interference. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.
