In a significant ruling strengthening procedural fairness under GST law, the Delhi High Court set aside the rejection of a taxpayer’s application for restoration of GST registration in Param Infrawell Private Limited v. State of NCT of Delhi & Others ([2026] 183 taxmann.com 557).
The Court held that where documentary evidence and field verification establish the genuineness of a business, authorities cannot mechanically reject amendment or restoration of GST registration merely on allegations of “non-existence.” The decision reiterates that tax administration must adhere to principles of natural justice and pass reasoned orders after proper consideration of material placed on record.
This judgment serves as an important reminder that GST registration — the foundation of indirect tax compliance — cannot be denied arbitrarily without objective assessment and due process.
Case Citation:
Param Infrawell Private Limited vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Others
[2026] 183 taxmann.com 557 (Delhi) | Decided on 06-02-2026
Court: Delhi High Court
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, Param Infrawell Private Limited, had applied for amendment of its GST registration due to a change in business address.
Subsequently:
- A Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued alleging that the petitioner was non-existent at the declared place of business.
- The amendment application was rejected.
- Consequentially, restoration of GST registration was denied.
The petitioner contended that:
- The change of address was duly intimated.
- Supporting documentary evidence was submitted.
- Field verification conducted by the department confirmed the business was genuine.
Issue Before the Court
Whether GST authorities were justified in rejecting the amendment/restoration application on the ground of “non-existence” despite documentary evidence and field verification supporting the petitioner’s genuineness?
Observations of the Court
The High Court observed:
- The documents placed on record substantiated the petitioner’s claim.
- Field verification did not conclusively establish that the petitioner was non-existent.
- Authorities failed to properly appreciate the material evidence.
- The action of rejection lacked proper consideration and violated principles of natural justice.
Held
The Delhi High Court:
- Set aside the impugned orders rejecting the amendment/restoration.
- Directed the authorities to:
- Reconsider the matter,
- Provide an opportunity of hearing,
- Pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.
Key Takeaway
GST registration cannot be denied mechanically on allegations of non-existence when:
- Documentary evidence supports the taxpayer,
- Field verification indicates genuineness, and
- Principles of natural justice require fair hearing and objective assessment.
This ruling reinforces that administrative authorities must act judiciously and not arbitrarily while dealing with GST registration matters.