9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (11) TMI 1010 - Commissioner - GSTRevocation of Cancellation of registration passed by the proper officer - proper officer in terms of the provision of Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017 r/w Rule 22 of CGST Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT - The appellant in his appeal memo has referred the Order for Cancellation of registration dated 18.03.2021 against which the appeal is filed. During personal hearing the authorized representative defended the case for appeal against Order for Rejection of application for revocation of cancellation dated 23.05.2021 and requested to allow appeal by way of revocation of registration. On being out the appellant has agreed to the error on his part and submitted that while filing appeal date of order against which appeal is filed wrongly considered for REG-19 instead of Order of rejection of revocation application (REG-05) - on account of inadvertent mistake, particulars of disputed order dated 18.03.2021 (REG-19) were wrongly entered of Registration passed by the learned Superintendent. This was a genuine clerical mistake which has caused ab-initio incorrectness in appeal memo. That the appellant has deposited of interest and be considered as the requirement has been complied. The adjudicating authority/proper officer has rejected the application for revocation of cancellation of registration as the appellant has not complied with the provisions of Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017 by not filing the revocation application within the prescribed time limit. In this context, the appellant submitted that due to corona pandemic and financial problem he could file GST returns and reply to the SCN issued by the proper officer - the adjudicating authority/proper officer has passed the order for rejection of Application for Revocation of Cancellation of registrations due to non-compliance of Section 30 of the CGST Act. In this context, the appellant submitted in their written submissions due to Covid-19 lock down and financial problem application of revocation of cancellation of registration within the prescribed period before the proper officer. The appellant has filed returns upto date of cancellation of registration hence, it is found that the appellant has substantially complied with the above said provisions of the CGST Act/Rules, 2017 in the instant case. Therefore, the registration of appellant may be considered for revocation by the proper officer. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues Involved:
1. Cancellation of GST registration due to non-filing of returns. 2. Application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration. 3. Compliance with Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017. 4. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on filing of returns and applications. 5. Applicability of Supreme Court orders on extension of limitation periods. 6. Compliance with Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017. Detailed Analysis: 1. Cancellation of GST Registration Due to Non-Filing of Returns: The GST registration of the appellant was canceled by the proper officer due to non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months. A show cause notice was issued on 09.09.2020, but the appellant did not respond or file the pending returns. Consequently, the registration was canceled effective 18.03.2021 under Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017. 2. Application for Revocation of Cancellation of GST Registration: The appellant applied for revocation of the GST registration on 07.05.2021. The proper officer issued a show cause notice on 20.05.2021 for rejection of the application, citing non-compliance with Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, and failure to pay the due interest. The application was ultimately rejected on 23.05.2021 for not being filed within the 30-day period post-cancellation. 3. Compliance with Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017: The appellant argued that the delay in filing the revocation application was due to the COVID-19 pandemic and financial difficulties. The proper officer rejected the application for non-compliance with Section 30, which requires filing within 30 days of cancellation. 4. Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Filing of Returns and Applications: During the personal hearing, the appellant reiterated that the COVID-19 situation and financial problems prevented timely filing of returns and the revocation application. The appellant had filed all pending returns and paid the applicable taxes and late fees up to March 2021. 5. Applicability of Supreme Court Orders on Extension of Limitation Periods: The Supreme Court, in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020, extended the period of limitation due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The period from 15.03.2020 to 14.03.2021 was excluded from the limitation period, and a 90-day extension was provided from 15.03.2021. This extension was reiterated in subsequent orders due to the second wave of the pandemic. 6. Compliance with Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017: Rule 23 outlines the procedure for revocation of cancellation of registration. The appellant must file all due returns and pay any due taxes, interest, penalty, and late fees. The appellant had complied with these requirements by filing the returns up to the date of cancellation and paying the pending dues. Conclusion: The appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The adjudicating authority's rejection of the revocation application was based on non-compliance with Section 30. However, considering the Supreme Court's orders on extension of limitation periods and the appellant's compliance with filing returns and paying dues, the appeal was allowed. The proper officer was directed to consider the revocation application after verifying the payment particulars and status of returns. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
|
