2022 (5) TMI 405 - HC - GST

Revocation of cancellation of Registration - continuously for six months or more, the petitioner has not filed return - HELD THAT - the benefit extended by this Court in the earlier orders referred to above both in Suguna Cutpiece Centre 2022 (2) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT as well as Tvl.Ram International 2022 (4) TMI 979 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - this Writ Petition is ordered on the same term mentioned in Paragraph 229 of the order of Suguna Cutpiece Centre 2022 (2) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT . First two direction are as follows The petitioners are directed to file their returns for the period prior to the cancellation of registration, if such returns have not been already filed, together with tax defaulted which has not been paid prior to cancellation along with interest for such belated payment of tax and fine and fee fixed for belated filing of returns for the defaulted period under the provisions of the Act, within a period of forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if it has not been already paid. It is made clear that such payment of Tax, Interest, fine / fee and etc. shall not be allowed to be made or adjusted from and out of any Input Tax Credit which may be lying unutilized or unclaimed in the hands of these petitioners.

Summary

Issues:
1. Cancellation of registration under the GST Act due to non-filing of returns for six months.
2. Challenging the cancellation order through a Writ Petition.
3. Appellate Authority's rejection of the appeal against the cancellation order.
4. Application of directions from previous judgments to the current case.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a dealer under the GST Act, had their registration canceled due to continuous non-filing of returns for six months. The Writ Petition sought to challenge this cancellation order issued by the respondents. The appeal filed before the Appellate Authority against the cancellation was also rejected, leading to the current legal recourse. The issue raised in this case had already been addressed in a previous judgment related to a batch of cases, providing a set of directions to be followed. These directions included requirements for filing returns, payment of defaulted taxes with interest, restrictions on utilizing unclaimed Input Tax Credit, and the process for reviving registration upon compliance.

The Court referred to previous judgments, such as "Suguna Cutpiece Centre" and "Tvl.Ram International," where detailed directions were provided regarding the reinstatement of registration post-cancellation. The Court applied the principles established in these judgments to the current case, emphasizing the importance of complying with the specified conditions for reinstatement. The judgment highlighted the necessity of paying outstanding taxes, penalties, and filing returns accurately to facilitate the revival of registration. Additionally, the Court emphasized the role of the respondents in overseeing the process and ensuring compliance with the stipulated conditions.

The learned Judge's directions from the previous cases were deemed applicable to the present situation, leading to the disposal of the Writ Petition in alignment with the conditions outlined in the cited judgments. The Court, considering the precedents and the benefit extended in similar cases, ordered the disposal of the current Writ Petition in line with the directives provided in the previous judgments. The judgment emphasized adherence to the specified conditions for reinstatement and the role of the respondents in facilitating the process within the stipulated timelines. Ultimately, the Writ Petition was disposed of without costs, following the established legal precedents and directions provided in previous relevant judgments.