2021 (1) TMI 705 - HC - GST

Court orders restoration of petitioner's GST registration, criticizes respondents for non-compliance

The Court found in favor of the petitioner, a registered society, in a case involving the cancellation and subsequent restoration of their GST ... Restoration of GST registration - implementation of appellate order - mandamus for compliance with statutory order - software or portal defect not a defence to non-compliance - requirement of FORM GST REG-12 and furnishing of returns for revocationRestoration of GST registration - implementation of appellate order - mandamus for compliance with statutory order - Respondents must restore the petitioner's GST registration on the GST Portal in compliance with the appellate order which set aside the cancellation. - HELD THAT: - The Court found that the order of the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) setting aside the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was not shown to be illegal or without jurisdiction by the respondents. The respondents could not justify non-implementation of that judicially rendered order by pointing to the petitioner's failure to access the GST Portal within the initial seven-day period. The Court held that a departmental or portal failure cannot be used to defeat or avoid compliance with a valid appellate order. Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed and the respondents were directed to restore the petitioner's GST registration on the GST Portal forthwith, within ten days from filing of a copy of the order before them.Writ petition allowed; respondents directed to restore the petitioner's GST registration on the GST Portal within ten days and to cooperate for compliance.Requirement of FORM GST REG-12 and furnishing of returns for revocation - software or portal defect not a defence to non-compliance - The contention that restoration could not be effected because the petitioner failed to file FORM GST REG-12 or furnish old returns was not accepted as a ground to refuse implementation of the appellate order. - HELD THAT: - Respondents relied on the statutory scheme and portal procedure, including the requirement of filing FORM GST REG-12 and furnishing outstanding returns and payments for revocation, to contend that manual restoration was impermissible. The Court observed that even if the statutory procedure requires an application for revocation, the department could not decline to give effect to an appellate order on the ground that the portal/software lacks a facility. The respondents were obliged to make necessary provisions or otherwise ensure compliance; inability or omission of the portal cannot be visited on the petitioner so as to deny the relief granted by the competent appellate authority.Respondents cannot refuse to implement the appellate order on the ground that FORM GST REG-12 was not filed or that the portal lacks functionality; they must facilitate restoration and cooperate to give effect to the order.Final Conclusion: The writ petition was allowed: the appellate order restoring the petitioner's GST registration must be implemented by the respondents forthwith (within ten days of service of this order), and the respondents are directed to cooperate and take such steps, including addressing any portal/software deficiency, to give effect to the order. Issues:1. Failure to file monthly returns leading to cancellation of GST registration.2. Non-implementation of appellate order restoring GST registration on the GST Portal.3. Dispute regarding manual restoration of GST registration and requirement of revocation application.Analysis:1. The case involved the petitioner, a registered society, failing to file monthly returns (GSTR-3B) for several months, resulting in the cancellation of their GST registration. A show cause notice was issued, and upon non-compliance, the registration was cancelled. However, the appellate authority later set aside this cancellation order and restored the petitioner's GST registration with effect from a specific date.2. The petitioner, aggrieved by the non-implementation of the appellate order on the GST Portal, sought relief through a writ petition. The petitioner requested the restoration of the registration certificate and active status on the portal, as directed by the appellate authority. The respondents initially argued about the responsibility for restoration, suggesting the petitioner should reapply online for registration.3. The respondents contended that manual restoration of GST registration was not possible, and the petitioner should have filed a revocation application in the prescribed form. They highlighted the requirements under Rule 23(1) of the GST Act, emphasizing the need for filing old returns, tax details, and interest or penalties along with the revocation application. The respondents argued that failure to comply with these requirements warranted dismissal of the writ petition.4. Despite the arguments presented by the respondents, the Court found that the appellate order restoring the petitioner's GST registration was legal and within jurisdiction. The Court emphasized that the respondents could not refuse to comply with a judicial order. The Court criticized the contention that there was no provision for restoration of GST registration, stating that it would be a travesty of justice. The Court held that the lack of a provision in the software was not the petitioner's fault, and the authorities were responsible for making necessary provisions on the GST Portal.5. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to restore the petitioner's GST registration on the GST Portal within ten days of the order. The Court instructed all respondents to cooperate to ensure compliance with the order, emphasizing the importance of upholding judicial decisions and ensuring justice for the petitioner.