2023 (1) TMI 238 - HC - GST

Cancellation of registration of petitioner - failure to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months - HELD THAT - Issue raised in this writ petition is no more res integra as identical challenge has been gone into by this Court in several writ petitions including in M/s. Chenna Krishnama Charyulu Karampudi v. Additional Commissioner (Appeals-1) 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. It would be just and proper if respondent No.2 gives a fresh opportunity of hearing to the petitioner since the matter pertains to cancellation of GST registration adversely effecting its business operations. Matter remanded back to the 2nd respondent who shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeks quashing of order cancelling GST registration. Appeal dismissed due to failure to file returns and discharge tax liability. Challenge of cancellation order previously addressed in a similar case. Court orders fresh hearing for petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a Hindu Undivided Family engaged in publishing newspapers, filed a petition under Article 226 seeking to annul the order dated 29.10.2021 by the 2nd respondent canceling their Goods and Service Tax (GST) registration. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's alleged failure to submit returns for six consecutive months. Despite the petitioner's detailed objection filed on 03.10.2021, the 2nd respondent proceeded with the cancellation, emphasizing that the petitioner remained liable to pay GST for any period pre or post-cancellation. The petitioner then appealed this decision, leading to the order-in-appeal dated 17.08.2022, which upheld the cancellation. The 1st respondent highlighted the petitioner's continuous business operations without fulfilling tax obligations, collecting taxes but not remitting them to the exchequer, and failing to file returns promptly. The 1st respondent concluded that the cancellation under section 29(3) of the CGST Act did not absolve the petitioner of prior tax liabilities, indicating an intention to evade payments.

The primary issue in this writ petition, which has been previously addressed in similar cases, revolves around the cancellation of GST registration affecting the petitioner's business operations. The Court, considering past judgments and maintaining consistency, deemed it appropriate for the 2nd respondent to grant the petitioner a fresh hearing. The Court set aside the order-in-appeal dated 17.08.2022 and the order dated 29.10.2021, remanding the matter back to the 2nd respondent for a new decision following due process. During the fresh hearing, the petitioner is permitted to submit the necessary returns as mandated by the law. The Court concluded the writ petition without imposing any costs and directed the closure of any pending miscellaneous applications related to the case.