2023 (11) TMI 875 - HC - GST

Cancellation of GSTIN registration of the petitioner - cancellation on the presumption that the petitioner has not commenced any business - HELD THAT - This Court is of the considered view that looking at any aspect it appears that the petitioner had only made genuine transactions and the error had been committed only on the part of the auditor who had filed GSTR-10 returns after knowing about the cancellation of GSTIN registration of the petitioner. Hence, the impugned order is liable to the set aside and the GSTIN registration No.33AQRPD0201D1ZO standing in the name of M/s.Selvi Transport is directed to be restored. Considering the submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader, the petitioner is directed to file an application for restoration of GSTIN registration within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the respondent shall revoke the cancellation of GSTIN registration No.33AQRPD0201D1ZO within a period of two weeks thereafter. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to cancellation of GSTIN registration due to filing of NIL returns by the auditor instead of showing actual outwards supplies, petitioner's inability to recover invoice amount due to cancelled GSTIN.

Summary:

Challenge to Cancellation of GSTIN Registration:
The petitioner, an illiterate owner-cum-driver of a lorry, challenged the cancellation of GSTIN registration by the respondent due to continuous filing of NIL returns by the auditor instead of showing actual outwards supplies. The petitioner had engaged an auditor for GST returns filing, who filed GSTR-10 after cancellation without restoring the GSTIN. The High Court observed that the cancellation was based on the auditor's actions, not the petitioner's genuine transactions. The Court set aside the cancellation and directed restoration of the GSTIN registration.

Inability to Recover Invoice Amount:
Despite successfully carrying on the transport business and raising invoices, the petitioner could not recover the invoice amount due to the cancelled GSTIN. The respondent argued that by filing GSTR-10, the petitioner accepted the cancellation and should not have raised invoices. However, the Court found the petitioner's reason for raising invoices genuine, attributing the error to the auditor. The Court directed the petitioner to file a formal application for restoration of GSTIN registration, which the respondent was ordered to revoke within two weeks of application.

The Writ Petition challenging the cancellation of GSTIN registration was disposed of in favor of the petitioner, with directions for restoration.