2023 (2) TMI 131 - HC - GST

Cancellation of registration of petitioner - petitioner having approached the Appellate Forum, which had not entertained it on the ground of delay in preferring the appeal is the line of arguments the respondent has adopted - HELD THAT - Petitioner says that he is ready to pay the taxes, which he shall do and will also move the concerned officer seeking the revocation. The Apex Court s direction for enlargement of the time during the COVID-19 also will come to rescue. It is also noticed that the powers given to the officer concerned under Rule 23 of CGST Rules where the proper officer if, is satisfied for the reasons to be recorded in writing that there are sufficient grounds for revocation of cancellation is obligated to revoke the cancellation by an order in Form GST REG No.22 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of application and communicate the same to the applicant. The period which the petitioner has spent before this court in pursuing this remedy shall also be construed and therefore, the statutory time period shall needs to be reckoned accordingly. The matter is adjourned to 08.02.2023.

Summary

Issues:
1. Show cause notice and cancellation of registration
2. Delay in preferring the appeal
3. Revocation of cancellation of registration
4. Interpretation of statutory time period

Analysis:

1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the show cause notice being cryptic and the subsequent cancellation of registration. The petitioner raised concerns regarding the brevity of the notice and the cancellation order. The respondent argued that the appeal was not entertained by the Appellate Forum due to a delay in filing. The Court referred to an order of the Central tax dated 25.06.2020, highlighting the provisions for filing an appeal under section 107 of the Act. The Court acknowledged the challenges faced by registered persons whose registrations were cancelled and the difficulties in revoking the cancellation within the specified time period.

2. Mr. Hasit Dave, the learned advocate for the petitioner, assured the Court that the petitioner is willing to pay the taxes and seek revocation of the cancellation. Reference was made to the Apex Court's direction for extending time during the COVID-19 pandemic, indicating a potential avenue for relief in this case.

3. The Court also considered the powers vested in the concerned officer under Rule 23 of the CGST Rules for revocation of cancellation. It was noted that if the proper officer is satisfied with sufficient grounds for revocation, they are obligated to issue an order within 30 days from the receipt of the application. The Court directed the initiation of this process within a week and specified timelines for payment of taxes and filing of returns.

4. Furthermore, the Court decided to keep the issue regarding the decision of Aggarwal Dying and Printing Works vs. State of Gujarat open and adjourned the matter to 08.02.2023. This decision indicates that the Court may further deliberate on the implications of the mentioned case law in the present matter, suggesting a nuanced approach to the legal interpretation and application of relevant precedents.