GST Registration Cancellation Appeal: Limitation Period Must Be Calculated From Actual Communication Date Under Section 107(1)

The HC allowed a petition challenging the dismissal of an appeal against GST registration cancellation. The appellate authority had rejected the appeal as time-barred, being filed after 2 years and 7 months against the 3-month statutory limit (extendable by 1 month). The court found that the appellate authority failed to consider when the cancellation order was actually communicated to the petitioner, which is crucial for calculating the limitation period under Section 107(1). The matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh consideration focusing on the communication date of the order.

---

---

Issues:
1. Appeal against cancellation of Goods and Services Tax registration dismissed as time-barred.
2. Interpretation of Section 107 of the Act regarding the time limit for filing an appeal.
3. Lack of evidence regarding the communication date of the order to the petitioner.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 challenging the dismissal of their appeal against the cancellation of their Goods and Services Tax registration as time-barred by the appellate authority and Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax, Indore.

2. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax had passed an order canceling the petitioner's registration under the G.S.T. Act on 19.12.2018. The petitioner appealed this decision on 11.08.2021, which was dismissed by the appellate authority citing Section 107 (1) of the Act, which allows appeals within three months, extendable by one month under Section 107(4). The appeal was filed after two years and seven months, deemed time-barred.

3. The petitioner argued that they were not served a notice by the Deputy Commissioner Sales Tax and only learned about the order from other sources, causing a delay in filing the appeal. The key issue was the date of communication of the order to the petitioner, as the limitation period starts from this date according to Section 107(1). The lack of evidence on record regarding the communication date led to the court setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter back to the appellate authority for reconsideration.

4. The High Court found that the crucial fact of when the order was communicated to the petitioner was not considered by the appellate authority. Therefore, the court allowed the petition, set aside the order, and directed the appellate authority to reconsider the matter and make a fresh decision in accordance with the law and observations made in the judgment.

5. In conclusion, the petition was allowed, and the matter was disposed of with a direction to the appellate authority to reexamine the case considering the communication date of the order to the petitioner.

---