TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Petitioner Granted Three Months to Appeal GST Registration Cancellation Despite Dispute Over Email Service Notice Under Section 107</h1> The HC disposed of the writ petition challenging cancellation of registration under UP GST Act, 2017, where petitioner claimed no proper notice was ... Maintainability of petition - appealable order or not - Section 107 of U.P. Goods & Service Act, 2017 - cancellation of registration of petitioner - HELD THAT:- Since, the appeal is entertainable under Section 107 of U.P. Goods & Service Act, 2017 within three months from the date the order to be appealed against is communicated to a person, as such, it is found appropriate to permit the petitioner to invoke the appellate remedy available to him under Section 107 of U.P. Goods & Service Act, 2017. This writ petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to invoke the appellate jurisdiction of the appellate authority under Section 107 of U.P. Goods & Service Act, 2017. Issues:Challenge to cancellation of registration as a dealer under U.P. Goods & Service Act, 2017 without receiving notice; Interpretation of appeal provisions under Section 107 of the Act; Validity of service through e-mail; Applicability of previous legal precedents on service methods; Timeliness of appeal filing based on communication date of the order.Analysis:The judgment addressed the challenge to the cancellation of the petitioner's registration as a dealer under the U.P. Goods & Service Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the order cancelling registration was issued without proper notice. The State argued that the order was appealable under Section 107 of the Act, which requires filing an appeal within three months of the communicated decision. The petitioner relied on a previous Division Bench ruling (M/s Kashi Bartan Bhandar Vs. State of U.P.) stating that service through e-mail is insufficient. The State Counsel disputed the legal proposition cited by the petitioner from the previous case.The Court considered the communication date of the order dated 30.10.2018, which the petitioner claimed to have received recently. Given the appeal provision under Section 107, the Court allowed the petitioner to invoke the appellate remedy available within three months from the communication date. The judgment did not delve into the merits of the parties' claims but disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods & Service Act, 2017. The Court directed the appellate authority to expedite the appeal process, mandating a decision within two months from the date of filing the appeal.In conclusion, the judgment focused on procedural aspects regarding the cancellation of registration, the interpretation of appeal provisions, the validity of service methods, and the timeliness of filing an appeal based on the communication date of the order. The Court's decision allowed the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy under the specified statutory provision, emphasizing the need for a prompt resolution by the appellate authority.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
