1. The petitioner is proprietary firm trading in all types of scraps is granted TIN No.2422601774 on 13.06.2013 under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “VAT Act”). The petitioner has been registered under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act with Registration w.e.f. 01.07.2017 and the certificate of the said registration dated 07.07.2018.

2. A show cause notice came to be issued for cancellation of Registration on 24.06.2019 on the ground that the same has been obtained by means of fraud, willful misstatement and suppression of the facts. He is also directed to appear on 28.06.2019 although no physical copy of notice has been received by him.

3. Soon thereafter vide communication dated 26.07.2019, the registration of the petitioner has been cancelled without mentioning any reason for cancellation and without following the due procedure prescribed under CGST Rules, 2017.

4. An application for revocation of the cancellation of Registration in form GST REG 21 on GST portal has been preferred by the petitioner on 01.08.2019. Nothing has been heard from the respondents in that regard. The petitioner has not received any response and for a long time the same has not been decided. The petitioner raised a grievance for revocation of registration on Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) vide communication dated 24.01.2021.

5. According to the petitioner, it has filed all GST returns upto June, 2019. Its taxable value is as such of ₹ 52,62,430/- on which he had paid central tax and integrated tax.

6. On the charge of fake purchases by DGGI, Surat, on 06.08.2019, immediately the petitioner had moved to the Court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and he was granted bail on 05.09.2019. So far no charge-sheet has been filed and there is no notice issued thereafter by the Department nor summons have been issued to any customers. The petitioner is therefore, before this Court seeking following prayers:

“5.1 The petitioner accordingly prays that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue:

a. A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction in the nature of mandamus to quash the order dated 26.07.2019 issued by the respondent for cancellation of registration under the GST Act.

b. A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to pass order for immediate revocation of GST number and / or to decide of revocation application. “

7. On 08.03.2021, this Court (Coram: Hon’ble the Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Bhargav D. Karia, J.) has directed learned AGP to take instructions in the matter within one week.

8. Today, the matter was taken up for hearing.

9. We heard learned advocate Shri Hardik Vora for the petitioner and learned AGP Trupesh Kathiriya, who has no instructions as to whether the matter, which is pending before the concerned Authority has been decided or not and also has no clue with regard to the outcome of the criminal proceedings started against the present petitioner.

10. Learned advocate Mr. Vora has drawn our attention to the fact that while cancelling the registration, notice had been issued, however, the same is not in form GST REG 19 as per Rule 22 Sub Rule (3). According to him, the application for revocation of cancellation of the registration though has been preferred by the petitioner, the same has not been heard till date. According to him, it is contrary to the CGST Rules, 2017.

11. Learned AGP has also not disputed that once an application is made for revocation of cancellation of registration, it is the discretion of the proper officer to be recorded in writing to revoke the cancellation of registration, if there are sufficient grounds existing in form GST REG 22 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of such application and communicate the same to the applicant. According to him, if the proper Officer is of the opinion that there are certain chances existing to reject the application for revocation, he needs to issue the notice in form GST REG 23 requiring the applicant to show cause as to why the application should not be rejected. He is also required to be time of 7 working days from the date of service of notice in form GST REG 24 and on receipt of such information and clarification, the officer is obligated to dispose of the application in the manner specified in Sub-Rule(2) of Rule 23 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of such information and clarification.

12. It emerges from the material on record that the application for revocation has been preferred by the petitioner on 16.08.2019, no procedure has been followed thereafter by the proper Officer and he has chosen not to issue any notice to show cause indicating his intention of rejection. When the statutory Rules provide for prescribed limit, he could not have simply sat tight over this application without doing anything in that regard and without fail he shall need to complete this process within one week from the date of receipt of the copy.

At this stage, learned AGP has drawn attention of this Court that in event he is required to reject the request of revocation of cancellation, he would be obligated to issue the notice for a period of 7 days and therefore more time will be desirable.

13. Noticing the fact that it is only after he decides not to accede to the request of revocation of cancellation that such a stage would come at that eventuality be also taken note of once the Officer chose not to allow the request straightaway he would have further period of 4 (four) weeks, 1 (one) week for issuance of notice and availing time to petitioner of one week as also to allow him representation and then 2 (two) weeks thereafter for him to decide finally. However, in the event he is agreed with the request of revocation of cancellation, the same shall be decided in a week’s time.

14. With the observation and direction, present petition stands disposed of. In the event of any necessity to take legal recourse, the Court has not chosen to go into merits of the matter.

Direct service is permitted.