[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Sikkim High Court
M/S A2Z Infra Engineering Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner And Ors on 23 February, 2026
COURT NO.1
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
Record of Proceedings
WP(C) No. 34 of 2024
M/S A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LTD. PETITIONER (S)
VERSUS
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS RESPONDENT (S)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Puneet Agarwal, (through V.C.), Mr.
Yuvraj Singh and Mr. Passang Tshering
Bhutia, Advocates.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sangita Pradhan, Deputy Solicitor General
of India with Ms. Natasha Pradhan and Ms.
Sittal Balmiki, Advocates.
Date: 23/02/2026
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, CHIEF JUSTICE
...
The Petitioner, M/s A2Z Infra Engineering Ltd., was registered under the
CGST Act, 2017. The said registration was cancelled by an order dated
30.10.2023. The cancellation was preceded by a show-cause notice dated
26.09.2023. In the show-cause notice, it was stated that upon inspection, the
business entity was found to be non-existent at the declared place of business
and that no business activities were being carried out from the said premises.
It appears that an email-reply was submitted by the Petitioner. It is
appropriate to refer to the brief reply submitted by the Petitioner, which is as
follows: -
".......
We, M/s A2Z Infra Engineering Limited ('the Company' or 'We'
or 'Us') are in receipt of the captioned SCN dated August 24,
2023 regarding which reply is required to be furnished to the
office of your good self by September 30, 2023. Copy of SCN
dated September 26, 2023. In this regard, we wish to submit
that The Company has a centralized accounting system, and
there are no accounts-related employees stationed in Sikkim.
Due to a recent cloud burst in Sikkim, none of the employees
were able to travel to the state. Therefore, it is requested to
the office of your goodself to grant us extension of another 20
days and grant us the opportunity to present our case before
the office of your goodself. We request the office of your
goodself to accept the reply of the Company and grant us the
personal hearing before taking any decision in this matter.
Thanking you in anticipation.
.........."
Page-14 of 3
COURT NO.1
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
Record of Proceedings
In fact, the Petitioner had also sought an opportunity of personal hearing
and requested an extension of time.
However, as seen from the final order impugned before this Court
cancelling the registration, no reasons have been assigned for such cancellation.
There is no reference to the reply submitted by the Petitioner or to the request
for extension of time.
In such circumstances, the impugned order is not sustainable in law and
requires reconsideration after properly adverting to the reasons stated by the
Petitioner. The explanation offered by the Petitioner ought to have been taken
into consideration.
The Petitioner further submits that valid reasons were explained for their
absence from the declared place of business and several documents have been
produced before this Court to establish that business activities were indeed being
carried out. It is also submitted that the Petitioner has subsequently obtained
fresh registration.
In such circumstances, I am of the view that the impugned order has to be
revisited after giving due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Petitioner will
file an application for cancellation of the earlier registration in view of the
subsequent registration. If that be so, the same shall also be considered before
deciding upon the cancellation of registration pursuant to the show-cause notice
dated 26.09.2023.
This writ petition being, WP(C) No. 34 of 2024, stands disposed of
accordingly.
Chief Justice
avi
Page-15 of 3
