9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 622 - HC - GSTCancellation of registration certificate of the petitioner - non-filing of GST returns continuously for more than six months - Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in M/S. CHENNA KRISHNAMA CHARYULU KARAMPUDI VERSUS THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER APPEALS1 AND ANOTHER 2022 (7) TMI 82 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT where it was held that Though the lower appellate authority may be right in holding that while it may allow filing of an appeal beyond the limitation of three months for a further period of one month, therefore, by extension of limitation beyond the extended period of one month delay beyond the extended period of one month cannot be condoned, we are of the view that such a stand taken by respondent No.1 may adversely affect the petitioner. The matter is remanded back to the file of respondent No.4 to consider the grievance expressed by the petitioner against cancellation of GST registration and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law - the writ petition is disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to order cancelling GST registration certificate. Analysis: The petitioner, a company engaged in real estate and renting, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash the order dated 27.08.2022 passed by respondent No.3, which rejected the appeal and confirmed the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration certificate by respondent No.4 on 14.12.2019. The cancellation was due to the petitioner's failure to submit GST returns continuously for more than six months. The petitioner appealed to respondent No.3, but the appeal was dismissed on grounds of limitation and failure to challenge the initial cancellation order. The issue raised in the writ petition was found to be similar to a previous decision of the Court in another case. The Court noted that no GST Tribunal had been constituted, which left the petitioner without a remedy. The Court decided to remand the matter back to respondent No.4 to reconsider the cancellation of the GST registration and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law. The Court set aside the orders of respondent No.4 and respondent No.3, emphasizing that it had not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case, and all contentions were kept open. In the detailed analysis of the previous decision, the Court highlighted the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 related to the appeal process and the limitation period for filing appeals. The Court noted that while the appellate authority could allow an appeal to be presented beyond the initial three-month limitation period for an additional month with sufficient cause, extending the limitation further was not permissible. The Court expressed concern that the cancellation of the GST registration without the existence of a GST Tribunal could leave the petitioner without any recourse. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Court remanded the matter back to respondent No.4 for reconsideration, emphasizing the need for the petitioner to submit all returns as required by law during the process. The Court's decision was based on ensuring a fair review of the petitioner's case and allowing for proper consideration in accordance with legal procedures. Overall, the judgment focused on the procedural aspects of the appeal process in the context of GST registration cancellation and highlighted the importance of providing a remedy to the petitioner in the absence of a GST Tribunal. The Court's decision to remand the matter back to the authorities for reconsideration underscored the need for a fair and lawful review of the case, while keeping all legal options open for the parties involved.
|
