9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (11) TMI 453 - HC - GSTCancellation of the petitioner's GST registration - no business for eleven months and had filed nil returns - HELD THAT - The appellate authority cannot be faulted for rejecting the appeal in view of the language of Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. At the same time, the petitioner should not be left without remedy. The reasons set out in the order of cancellation is non filing of returns for a continuous period of more than six months. In TVL. SUGUNA CUTPIECE CENTER VERSUS THE APPELLATE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) (GST) , THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CIRCLE) , SALEM BAZAAR. 2022 (2) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , this Court directed restoration of registration subject to certain conditions. The petitioner is directed to file returns for the period prior to the cancellation of registration, together with tax dues along with interest thereon and the fee fixed for belated filing of returns within a period of forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Appeal against cancellation of GST registration, rejection of appeal as time-barred, restoration of registration, conditions for restoration. Analysis: The petitioner challenged an appellate order rejecting the appeal against the cancellation of their GST registration. The petitioner had received a show cause notice regarding the cancellation of registration due to non-filing of returns for eleven months, following which the cancellation order was issued. The appeal against this cancellation order was rejected as time-barred, leaving the petitioner with no remedy except to approach the High Court. The counsel for the petitioner argued that due to the rejection of the appeal, the petitioner had no other option but to seek relief from the Court. Reference was made to a previous order of the Court in a related matter. The respondents' counsel pointed out that the appeal was filed after the permissible period for condonation of delay and raised concerns about the filing of returns up to the date of cancellation. The Court acknowledged that the appellate authority was correct in rejecting the appeal based on the provisions of Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. However, considering the circumstances, the petitioner should not be left without a remedy. Referring to a previous case, the Court directed the restoration of registration subject to certain conditions, emphasizing the importance of filing returns and clearing tax dues. The Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions for the petitioner to comply with in order to restore the GST registration. These directions included filing returns for the period before and after the cancellation, paying tax dues, and following the prescribed procedures for utilizing Input Tax Credit. The respondents were instructed to facilitate the necessary changes on the GST Web portal to enable the petitioner to fulfill these requirements within specified timelines. The restoration of GST registration was made conditional upon the petitioner meeting all the prescribed conditions within the stipulated time frame. The Court concluded the judgment by disposing of the petition and related matters without imposing any costs on the parties involved.
|
