` 119 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Deepak Kumar Union of India and others CORAM: HON’BLE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. 1. This petition is directed against order dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure P/6) whereby the petitioner’s 2. The order impugned refers to Rule 21 (a) of the CGST and thereafter order impugned also petitioner on 24.03.2026 3. The order impugned is assailed primarily on the ground t reply submitted on merits to the show cause notice has not been adverted to. Along with the material to show that the observation and finding of the authorities with regard to non-functioning of the business from the declared place is factually incorrect. Learned counsel has also placed reliance on various orders passed by this Court in similar circumstances. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-18054 Date of Decision: 03.07.2026 Deepak Kumar Vs. Union of India and others HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocate for Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents *** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral) This petition is directed against order dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure P/6) whereby the petitioner’s GST registration has been cancelled. The order impugned refers to Rule 21 (a) of the CGST and thereafter, the cancellation of registration is ordered w.e.f. 03.09.2021 order impugned also makes reference to a show cause notice issued to the petitioner on 24.03.2026. The order impugned is assailed primarily on the ground t reply submitted on merits to the show cause notice has not been adverted to. Along with the reply to show cause notice, the petitioner has annexed certain show that the observation and finding of the authorities with regard to ioning of the business from the declared place is factually incorrect. Learned counsel has also placed reliance on various orders passed by this Court in similar circumstances. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 18054-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.07.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocate for Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents - UOI. (Oral) This petition is directed against order dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure registration has been cancelled. The order impugned refers to Rule 21 (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017 the cancellation of registration is ordered w.e.f. 03.09.2021. to a show cause notice issued to the The order impugned is assailed primarily on the ground that the reply submitted on merits to the show cause notice has not been adverted to. show cause notice, the petitioner has annexed certain show that the observation and finding of the authorities with regard to ioning of the business from the declared place is factually incorrect. Learned counsel has also placed reliance on various orders passed by this Court This petition is directed against order dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure Rules, 2017 . The to a show cause notice issued to the hat the reply submitted on merits to the show cause notice has not been adverted to. show cause notice, the petitioner has annexed certain show that the observation and finding of the authorities with regard to ioning of the business from the declared place is factually incorrect. Learned counsel has also placed reliance on various orders passed by this Court RAJESH KUMAR 2026.07.07 13:19 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-18054-2026 [2] 4. Learned counsel for the revenue, who has appeared on advance notice, opposes the prayer made in the writ petition but he has not been able to point out any discussion in the order impugned with regard to defence set up by the petitioner in the reply to the show cause notice. 5. Once a reply to the show cause notice has been submitted by the petitioner, the authorities are expected to deal with such explanation before taking a final view in the matter. Issuance of show cause notice is not an empty formality. Merely stating that the reply has been taken into consideration does not improve the situation any further. The order cancelling the registration otherwise carries civil consequences and the same must disclose application of mind on the part of the competent authority with regard to explanation submitted by the petitioner on merits, to the accusations made in the show cause notice. 6. Since such consideration is clearly wanting in the order impugned, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that such order cannot be sustained. As a consequence, the present writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Order dated 21.05.2026, stands quashed. Liberty stands reserved to the respondents to deal with the petitioner’s reply on merits and pass fresh orders, in accordance with law. 7. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (ROHIT KAPOOR) JUDGE 03.07.2026 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2026.07.07 13:19 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.