2024 (3) TMI 1220 - HC - GST

Seeking to revoke the cancellation of GST registration - which was accepted by the portal and was also issued a Form DRC-03 under Rule 142(2) and 142(3) of the GST Rules, 2017 but has not issued any DRC-03 - Petitioning university paid the taxes - HELD THAT - Learned counsel for the petitioner, today, undertakes that the petitioner shall move an application for revocation within a period of two weeks from today. Though, it is beyond the prescribed time limit u/s 30 of the Act, the petitioner is willing to pay whatever late fee/penalty be imposed for the delay in submission of the returns, and the respondents, upon such receipt of application from the petitioner, shall immediately revoke the cancellation of registration. Given the said factual matrix of the case as also the judicial pronouncements that are referred to in the preceding paragraphs, if the default on the part of the petitioner is only so far as non-furnishing of the returns, we are of the considered opinion that subject to the petitioner making good the default, the said GST registration of the petitioner-university would get restored which would enable the petitioner to process the affiliation proceedings in respect of the various colleges under the petitioner-university, which would also generate GST revenue to the respondent authorities as well. Thus, this Writ Petition stands allowed.

Summary

Issues involved: Petition seeking revocation of GST registration cancellation for non-filing of returns within stipulated period, violation of constitutional articles and principles of natural justice.

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the revocation of the cancellation of GST registration. The petitioner had paid taxes and filed returns till a certain period, but the registration was cancelled without issuing a DRC-03 for a subsequent period. The petitioner argued that the cancellation was violative of constitutional articles and principles of natural justice. The petitioner requested the court to set aside the cancellation certificate and pass necessary orders.

The petitioner's counsel explained that the cancellation occurred due to a delay in submitting returns, which was rectified by paying all dues after becoming aware of the cancellation. The petitioner needed the registration to process affiliation proceedings for various colleges. The court noted that no specific application was made under Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for revocation of the cancellation.

The petitioner agreed to submit an application for revocation within two weeks, despite being beyond the prescribed time limit. The petitioner was willing to pay any late fee or penalty for the delay. The court directed the authorities to immediately revoke the cancellation upon receiving the application.

Referring to a Delhi High Court decision, the court emphasized the need for a pragmatic approach in cases of GST registration cancellation. A similar decision by the Madras High Court was also cited, outlining conditions for reviving cancelled registrations. The court decided that, if the default was only in non-filing of returns, the petitioner's GST registration should be restored upon rectifying the default.

In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed, and no costs were imposed. The court relied on previous judicial pronouncements and directed the restoration of the petitioner's GST registration to facilitate affiliation proceedings for colleges under the petitioner-university, generating revenue for the authorities.