9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (1) TMI 1365 - HC - GSTCancellation of registration of petitioner - non-furnishing of returns in compliance of the provisions of Section 29 2 c of the GST Act 2017 for a continuous period of 6 or more months - HELD THAT - Having regard to the fact that the GST registration of the petitioner has been canceled under Section 29 2 c of the CGST Act 2017 for the reason that the petitioner did not submit returns for a period of 6 six months and more; the provisions contained in the proviso to sub-rule 4 of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules 2017 and the orders passed by the coordinate benches of this Court as well as by this Court in similar matters whereby the matters have been disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to revoke the cancellation of registration upon due payment of all statutory dues payable by the petitioners this Court is of the considered view that no purpose will be served by keeping this writ petition pending and the present writ petition can be disposed of in similar terms as had been made in similar other writ petitions. The impugned order dated 10.02.2021 Annexure-C is hereby interfered with and set aside. The petitioner is directed to approach the concerned authority within a period of 1 one month from today seeking revocation of cancellation and restoration of his GST registration - Petition disposed off.
The judgment from the Gauhati High Court addresses the cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner due to non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months, as mandated under Section 29(2)(c) of the GST Act, 2017. The petitioner, engaged in works contracts, was unable to comply due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on his business operations.
Issues Presented and Considered The core legal questions considered in this judgment include:
Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents Section 29(2)(c) of the GST Act, 2017 allows for the cancellation of registration if a registered person fails to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months. Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 outlines the procedure for cancellation and potential revocation of registration. The proviso to Rule 22(4) provides that if a person files all pending returns and pays the due taxes, interest, and late fees, the proceedings for cancellation can be dropped. Court's Interpretation and Reasoning The Court interpreted the provisions of Section 29(2)(c) and Rule 22, emphasizing the discretionary power of the proper officer to revoke cancellation if the taxpayer complies with filing and payment requirements. The Court acknowledged the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic as a significant factor affecting the petitioner's ability to file returns timely. Key Evidence and Findings The petitioner failed to file returns for over six months due to financial hardships caused by the pandemic. The petitioner filed returns up to February 2021 but could not apply for revocation of cancellation within the prescribed time limit. The petitioner also missed the deadline to appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act. Application of Law to Facts Given the petitioner's willingness to comply with the filing and payment requirements post-pandemic and the Court's previous orders in similar cases, the Court found it appropriate to allow the petitioner to seek revocation of the cancellation of GST registration. Treatment of Competing Arguments The respondent did not dispute the Court's previous decisions in similar cases, where GST registrations were restored under comparable circumstances. The Court noted the importance of including the petitioner within the GST regime for revenue collection purposes. Significant Holdings Core Principles Established The Court underscored the principle that taxpayers should be given an opportunity to rectify their non-compliance, especially in extraordinary circumstances like the Covid-19 pandemic, provided they are willing to fulfill their statutory obligations. Final Determinations on Each Issue The Court set aside the cancellation order dated 10.02.2021 and directed the petitioner to approach the concerned authority within one month to seek revocation of cancellation. The authority must inform the petitioner of any outstanding dues, which the petitioner must pay to have the GST registration restored. The judgment concludes with the disposal of the writ petition, emphasizing the need for the petitioner to comply with statutory requirements to facilitate the restoration of GST registration, thereby aligning with the Court's approach in similar cases.
|
