GOYAL BROTHERS vs COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND OTHERS — CWP/12886/2026
Case under Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section 74. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 12th May 2026.
CNR: PHHC010701162026
Next Hearing
28th April 2026
e-Filing Number
24-04-2026
Filing Number
CWP/25110/2026
Filing Date
24-04-2026
Registration No
CWP/12886/2026
Registration Date
24-04-2026
Judge
MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL , MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Coram
MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL , MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Bench Type
Double
Category
6.41 - GOODS AND SERVICE TAX WRIT PUNJAB (INDIRECT) ( 391 )
Judicial Branch
WRITS -I BRANCH
Decision Date
12th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISPOSED OF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GOYAL BROTHERS
Adv. MUKUL SINGLA
Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax and Others
Respondent(s)
COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND OTHERS
Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax and Others
Superintendent, Central Goods and Services Tax
State of Punjab
Excise and Taxation Officer cum State Tax Officer, Punjab Goods and Services Tax
Excise and Taxation Officer cum State Tax Officer, Punjab goods and Services Tax
Orders
Case Summary: CWP/12886/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana set aside the GST registration retrospective cancellation order dated 15.06.2025 against Goyal Brothers, finding that the authorities failed to serve a specific notice informing the petitioner of the intention to retrospectively cancel registration before passing the order. The court held that quasi-judicial authorities must act fairly and put assesses on notice of proposed actions with retrospective effect, including the grounds and supporting material relied upon. The respondents were granted liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CWP/12886/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana set aside the GST registration retrospective cancellation order dated 15.06.2025 against Goyal Brothers, finding that the authorities failed to serve a specific notice informing the petitioner of the intention to retrospectively cancel registration before passing the order. The court held that quasi-judicial authorities must act fairly and put assesses on notice of proposed actions with retrospective effect, including the grounds and supporting material relied upon. The respondents were granted liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts