9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 863 - HC - GSTMaintainability of petition - it is alleged that the petitioner did not deposit 20% amount as directed by the High Court within 15 days - workable proposal given by the petitioner was for a period of 5 years - Cancellation of the GST Registration of the petitioner - HELD THAT - The Division Bench of this Court in M/S RAM SINGH WORK CONTRACTOR THRU PROPRIETOR RAM SINGH VERSUS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER GRADE- 2, COMMERCIAL TAX AYODHYA AND ANR. 2022 (1) TMI 1247 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT has already interfered in the matter and admittedly the petitioner has also deposited the amount on 04.02.2022 as was required to be deposited which admittedly has been received by the Department on 19.02.2022 as per the statement given by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions and the fact that in terms of Section 80 of the GST Act the application for 24 installments was to be moved, present petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to file an application under the provisions of Section 80 of the GST Act and Rule 23 of the GST Rules within three days from today. Petition disposed off.
Issues involved:
1. Challenge to the impugned order dated 29.03.2022 passed by Additional Commissioner Grade 2 Commercial Tax, Ayodhya. 2. Direction to take GST in easy monthly installments. 3. Revocation of GST Registration cancellation. 4. Direction to refrain from coercive action during the pendency of the writ petition. Issue 1: Challenge to the impugned order dated 29.03.2022: The petitioner sought the quashing of the order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner Grade 2 Commercial Tax, Ayodhya. The petitioner had previously filed a writ petition which directed the appellate authority to decide the pending appeal promptly. The appellate authority rejected the appeal on grounds of non-compliance with the deposit requirement and proposing a payment plan for five years instead of the specified period. The petitioner argued that the deposit was made within the stipulated time and expressed willingness to comply with the payment terms under Section 80 of the GST Act. The court acknowledged the deposit made by the petitioner and directed the petitioner to file an application under Section 80 of the GST Act and Rule 23 of the GST Rules within three days for consideration within two weeks. Issue 2: Direction to take GST in easy monthly installments: The petitioner requested a writ mandating the opposite party to accept GST payment in easy monthly installments for three financial years. The petitioner had deposited a portion of the outstanding amount and expressed readiness to comply with the payment schedule under Section 80 of the GST Act. The court directed the petitioner to file a formal application under Section 80 of the GST Act and Rule 23 of the GST Rules within three days for prompt consideration within two weeks. Issue 3: Revocation of GST Registration cancellation: The petitioner sought a direction for the revocation of the cancellation of their GST registration. The petitioner argued that the cancellation occurred despite compliance with the deposit requirements and expressed willingness to adhere to the payment terms specified under the law. The court acknowledged the deposit made by the petitioner and directed the petitioner to file an application under Section 80 of the GST Act and Rule 23 of the GST Rules within three days for consideration within two weeks. Issue 4: Direction to refrain from coercive action: The petitioner sought a writ preventing the opposite parties from taking any coercive action during the pendency of the writ petition. The court did not specifically address this issue in the judgment but disposed of the petition, leaving it open for the petitioner to file an application under Section 80 of the GST Act and Rule 23 of the GST Rules for prompt consideration within two weeks. In conclusion, the court acknowledged the petitioner's compliance with the deposit requirement and directed them to file formal applications under Section 80 of the GST Act and Rule 23 of the GST Rules for consideration within two weeks. The judgment focused on ensuring adherence to the statutory payment terms and expeditious resolution of the matter to prevent further business disruptions for the petitioner.
|
