- Case
- Saurabh Sahu v. The State of Maharashtra through the Finance Secretary (Bombay High Court, 01-07-2025)
- Law
- Central Goods and Services Tax Act, Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act.
Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the MGST Act”): The judgment concerns a challenge to an order dated 07 July 2023, for cancellation of the Petitioner's registration under the MGST Act. The court notes that the show cause notice referred to Section 29(2)(e), stating registration was obtained by fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts. The court found that merely quoting a section and alleging fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts in a show cause notice is insufficient. The noticee must be given an idea of what the alleged fraud, misstatement, or suppression of facts was. The court also notes the show cause notice did not specify the appointed date or time for a personal hearing.
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017: The judgment refers to Form GST REG-17 [See Rule 22(1)/ sub-rule (2A) of rule 21A]. The show cause notice mentions Section 29(2)(e) - registration obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. The court found the show cause notice vague and bereft of particulars.
General Principles of Law: The judgment discusses principles of natural justice, specifically in the context of a vague show cause notice. The court states that any action based upon such a vague show cause notice cannot be sustained because the same would be a product of a violation of principles of natural justice. The court emphasizes that fairness of the decision-making process is paramount, and any process not underpinned by natural justice renders the final decision susceptible to challenge. The court also addresses the issue of delay and alternative remedies, stating that in cases of a gross breach of principles of natural justice, petitioners should not be relegated to alternative remedies.
