GST Registration Cancellation Writ Petition Upheld: Procedural Fairness Mandates Reconsideration of Case Within Specified Timeframe

HC allowed writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation. Due to absence of GST Tribunal and delay in appeal filing, the court directed primary authority to reconsider the case within a specified timeframe. The decision emphasized procedural fairness and the need for proper judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.

---

---

Issues:
1. Appeal rejection due to delay in filing within the condonable period.
2. Cancellation of GST registration by the 1st respondent.
3. Jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
4. Lack of GST Tribunal constitution under Section 109 of the CGST Act.
5. Remittal of the matter back to the primary authority for reconsideration.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to challenge the appeal rejection order passed by the 2nd respondent due to a delay in filing the appeal within the condonable period. The appeal was dismissed for exceeding the limitation period allowed under Section 107 of the GST Act. The petitioner argued for restoration of registration citing reasons for non-filing returns. The counsel relied on a similar case where the writ petition was allowed for reconsideration by the primary authority.

2. The cancellation of GST registration by the 1st respondent was based on the petitioner's failure to file returns for six months before the issuance of the show-cause notice. The petitioner's appeal against this cancellation was rejected due to a delay beyond the condonable period, leading to the writ petition challenging this decision.

3. The jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution was invoked by the petitioner as the GST Tribunal was not constituted under Section 109 of the CGST Act, leaving the petitioner with no other legal recourse. The petitioner sought the court's intervention to remit the matter back to the primary authority for reconsideration.

4. The lack of constitution of the GST Tribunal under Section 109 of the CGST Act was highlighted as a crucial factor in the decision-making process. The court considered this absence of an appellate forum and deemed it necessary to allow the writ petition and remit the matter back to the primary authority for a fresh review and decision in accordance with the law.

5. The High Court, after perusing the record and a previous decision, decided to remit the matter back to the primary authority for reconsideration within a specified timeframe. Emphasizing the need for justice and lack of the GST Tribunal, the court allowed the writ petition, directing the primary authority to re-examine the petitioner's case promptly.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the writ petition, remitting the matter back to the primary authority for reconsideration, considering the delay in filing the appeal, cancellation of GST registration, lack of a constituted GST Tribunal, and the interests of justice.

---