Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (2) TMI 759

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unequivocal and must be enforced regardless of shortcomings in the scheme of GST enactment. The right to carry on trade or profession cannot be curtailed contrary to the constitutional guarantee under Art. 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. If the person like petitioner is not allowed to revive the registration, the state would suffer loss of revenue and the ultimate goal under GST regime will stand defeated. The petitioner deserves a chance to come back into GST fold and carry on his business in legitimate manner. The petitioner, who is sufferer of unique circumstances resulting from pandemic and his health barriers, would be put to great hardship for want of GST registration. The petitioner who is small scale entreprene .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dly be quashed and set aside. (E) That, the Hon ble High court may kindly hold that, the petitioner registration no.27AHQPD2485F1Z7 is valid from 28.2.20222 onwards. 3. The petitioner is a proprietary firm engaged in the business of fabrication work. It is registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act) as well as Maharashtra State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The certificate of registration dated 20-07-2018 has been issued to his firm with registration No. 27AHQPD2485F1Z7. Petitioner contends that since he had undergone angioplasty, and the firm suffered financial set back in pandemic situation, GST returns from August 2021 could not be filed. Section 29(2) of the GST Act enables proper officer to cancel regist .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... submitted beyond the prescribed period provided under section 107 (1) and 107 (4) of the MGST Act, 2017. 6. Mr Alok Sharma, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the vendor of the Bajaj Auto Limited and earns his livelihood through fabrication business. Due to pandemic situation, the business activities of the petitioner were hampered causing huge financial loss. The petitioner was also unwell. In August 2021, he underwent angioplasty. Mr Sharma would further submit that petitioner could not submit his GST returns during the relevant period and suffered cancellation of the resignation. He would submit that the petitioner had approached the appellate authority challenging cancellation of the registrati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. We have considered the submissions advanced by both the sides. It appears that the petitioner was earning his livelihood through his fabrication business and requires registration under GST Act to run the business. The entire world suffered during the pandemic. The small scale industrialists and service providers like petitioner lost their business for more than two years. The financial losses suffered during this time cannot be ignored particularly when it comes to small scale businesses and service providers. To add apathy to this situation, the petitioner suffered medical emergency. He was required to undergo medical treatment for heart disease and the procedure like angiopla .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s merely a matter of cancellation of registration, the question of limitation should not bother us since it cannot be said that any right has accrued to the State which would rather be adversely affected by cancellation. 12. In this regard, a reference can be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. Vs Union of India reported in (1997) 5 SCC 536. The supreme court observed that the jurisdiction of the High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India or Supreme Court under Article 32 cannot be restricted by the provision of any Act to bar or curtail remedies. True that while exercising the constitutional power, the Court would certainly take note of legislative intent manifested in the provision .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates