System-Generated GST Cancellation Notice Without Officer Details Invalid | HC

Case Details: M Y Ent Bhatta vs. State of U.P. - [2025] 181 taxmann.com 194 (Allahabad)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Arun Bhansali, CJ. & Kshitij Shailendra, J.
• Aditya Pandey for the Petitioner.
• S.C. Ankur Agarwal for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged the system-generated show cause notice issued for cancellation of its GST registration on the ground of non-filing of returns for six months, which also resulted in suspension of the registration from the same date. The petitioner contended that the subsequent cancellation order was unsustainable because the foundational notice itself was invalid. During the proceedings, the authorities produced an explanation from GSTN stating that digital signatures were not necessary, as the authorities log in digitally, but the petitioner submitted that this explanation could not cure the non-mention of the officer in the notice. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the power to initiate proceedings under Sections 29 of the CGST Act and the Uttar Pradesh GST Act vests in designated officers, not in an automated system. It held that while the GSTN advisory could explain the absence of a digital signature, it could not justify the complete omission of the name and office of the issuing authority, which rendered the show cause notice under the Act and the Rules. It further held that an order of cancellation founded upon such an invalid notice could not be sustained in law. The Court accordingly quashed both the impugned show cause notice and the consequent cancellation order.