Cancellation of assessee’s registration upheld as supplier non-existent and no genuine transaction proof – Bombay High Court{Afzal Husain Altaf Husain Saiyed V/s Union of India (2025) 32 Centax 190 (Bom.)}
Issues:
Whether the cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2) read with Rule 21 of the CGST Rules, 2017, was justified
Facts:
- The assessee claimed ITC based on transactions with suppliers who were found to be non-existent upon physical verification.
- Despite opportunities, the assessee failed to produce documentary evidence such as invoices, e-way bills, or bank statements to substantiate the genuineness of the transactions.
Held:
- The Court found no procedural lapses in the cancellation process and noted that the assessee did not discharge the burden of proof to establish the genuineness of the ITC claims.
- The cancellation of GST registration was upheld, reinforcing that ITC claims must be supported by verifiable documentation and that the burden of proof lies with the claimant.
