2022 (6) TMI 760 - HC - GST

Cancellation/suspension of registration of petitioner - delay of 865 days in filing appeal - time limitation - Section 29 and Section 107 of CGST Act - HELD THAT - Section 29 of the Act of 2017 is confined to an application for revocation against cancellation of registration whereas Section 107 of the Act of 2017 deals with the provisions of Appeal including limitation to file appeal. The limitation under Section 107 of the Act of 2017 is three months which is evident from the perusal of the statutory provision contained in Section 107 of the Act of 2017. However, Section 29 of the Act of 2017 is entirely different and only deals with the application for revocation of cancellation of registration. Perusal of circular dated 25/06/2020 reflect that it is unambiguous and in no uncertain terms only deals with Section 29 of the Act of 2017 and not with Section 107 of Act of 2017. Apparently, in the present case the appeal of the petitioner which was moved under Section 107 of the Act of 2017 has been rejected by the Appellate Authority inasmuch being time barred. It is further observed that the directive of Apex Court were issued subsequently upon out break of Covid-19 Pendemic in the year 2020 whereas in the present case, the registration was canceled on 04/02/2019 and the appeal was preferred on 16/09/2019. The reasoning given by the lower Appellate Authority are just and proper. Circular dated 25/06/2020 (Annexure P/6) is of no assistance to petitioner inasmuch as the same only deals with Section 29 of the Act of 2017 and not with Section 107 of the Act of 2017 - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to cancellation of registration and dismissal of appeal based on circular dated 25/06/2020.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a service provider registered under GST, challenged the cancellation of registration and dismissal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner argued that the orders were passed without considering the circular dated 25/06/2020, which provided relaxation for revoked registrations. The petitioner also claimed entitlement to relief based on a Supreme Court directive regarding extension of limitation orders during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The respondents contended that the petition was misconceived as the grounds for challenge were not applicable to the petitioner. They argued that reliance on the circular dated 25/06/2020 was misplaced, urging the dismissal of the petition.

Upon considering the arguments, the Court referred to Sections 29 and 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017. Section 29 pertains to cancellation or suspension of registration, while Section 107 deals with appeals to the Appellate Authority. The Court noted that the limitation for filing an appeal under Section 107 is three months. The circular dated 25/06/2020 specifically addressed Section 29, detailing the calculation of the application period for revocation of registration cancellation.

The Court found that the circular was limited to Section 29 and did not apply to Section 107. It observed that the appeal by the petitioner was time-barred under Section 107, as the registration was canceled in 2019, and the appeal was filed in 2019, pre-dating the Covid-19 pandemic directives. Consequently, the Court upheld the decision of the lower Appellate Authority, dismissing the writ petition without costs.