GST registration cancellation appeal dismissed due to non-compliance with filing and tax payment rules.

The appeal against the cancellation of GST registration and rejection of revocation application was dismissed by the Commissioner. The appellant's arguments regarding non-filing of returns, impact of late fees, and COVID-19 were considered. However, the Commissioner found that the appellant did not meet the requirements for revocation as per CGST Rules, specifically regarding filing returns and paying tax liabilities before applying for revocation. Despite filing returns late and not paying late fees within the specified period, the appellant's appeal was rejected, and the cancellation of registration was upheld.

---

---

Issues:
Cancellation of GST registration due to non-filing of returns and rejection of revocation application.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the cancellation of GST registration due to non-filing of returns for six months, and the rejection of the revocation application. The appellant argued that the cancellation was erroneous and violated principles of natural justice. They claimed that they were preoccupied with another business, had no business transactions, and had filed for revocation within the extended time limit. The appellant also highlighted the impact of late fees and the COVID-19 pandemic on their situation. During the virtual hearing, the authorized representative reiterated these grounds and requested revocation to start the business. The Commissioner reviewed all submissions and proceeded to decide the appeal.

The Commissioner noted that the registration was cancelled due to non-filing of returns and failure to respond to a show cause notice. The appellant contended that they had not started any business activities until the cancellation and had filed all pending returns by a specific date. However, the relevant provisions under Rule 23 of the CGST Rules state that returns must be filed and any tax liabilities paid before applying for revocation. The Commissioner also referred to a circular clarifying the requirements for revocation in cases of cancellation due to non-filing of returns.

The Commissioner further referenced a notification regarding the waiver of late fees up to a certain period, which the appellant did not comply with. Despite the appellant filing returns after the specified period, it was found that late fees were not paid for the relevant period. As a result, the Commissioner concluded that the appellant did not meet the requirements for revocation as per the CGST Rules. Therefore, the appeal was rejected, and the cancellation of registration was upheld.

In conclusion, the Commissioner dismissed the appeal based on the appellant's failure to comply with the provisions for revocation of registration following the cancellation due to non-filing of returns. The decision was made considering the specific requirements outlined in the CGST Rules and the lack of adherence to the waiver of late fees for the relevant period.

---