2024 (5) TMI 247 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of appellate remedy which the petitioner availed with gross delay - Cancellation of GST registration - HELD THAT - An appeal was to be filed on or before 30.06.2022 as permitted by the Hon ble Supreme Court in IN RE COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION 2022 (1) TMI 385 - SC ORDER and if necessary with a delay condonation application within one month thereafter. The appeal is said to have been filed only on 05.11.2023, after about one year five months from the date on which even the extended limitation period expired. In the above circumstances, there are no reason to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, especially since it is not a measure to be employed where there are alternate remedies available and the assessee has not been diligent in availing such alternate remedies within the stipulated time. The law favours the diligent and not the indolent. Further, the Government had come out with an Amnesty Scheme by Circular No. 3 of 2023, by which the registered dealers, whose registrations were cancelled were permitted to restore their registration on payment of all dues between 31.03.2023 to 31.08.2023. The petitioner did not avail of such remedy also. The petitioner does not have any case that the show-cause notice was not received by him. Further, it is also pertinent that the reason stated in the show-cause notice for cancellation of registration is that the petitioner has not filed returns for a continuous period of six months. The petitioner does not have a case that he had in fact filed a return in the continuous period of six months. The writ petition stands dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved: Cancellation of registration, delay in availing appellate remedy, applicability of limitation period, failure to utilize Amnesty Scheme, non-filing of returns leading to cancellation.

The High Court judgment addressed the issue of cancellation of registration due to a delay in availing the appellate remedy. The petitioner had failed to file an appeal within the stipulated time frame, even after the limitation period was extended due to the pandemic situation. The court emphasized that extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be invoked when alternate remedies are available and the party has not been diligent in utilizing them within the specified time.

The judgment also considered the applicability of the Amnesty Scheme introduced by the Government, allowing registered dealers to restore their registration by paying outstanding dues within a specified period. The petitioner in this case did not take advantage of this scheme, further weakening their position in seeking relief from the court.

Moreover, the court noted that the petitioner had not contested the receipt of the show-cause notice for cancellation of registration. The reason cited for cancellation was the non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months, and the petitioner failed to demonstrate that returns had indeed been filed during this period. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, highlighting the importance of complying with statutory requirements to maintain registration status.