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>High Court Reinstates GST Registration After Procedural Review, Allowing Taxpayer Opportunity to Rectify Defaults Without Extra Penalties</h1> HC allowed the writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation. Despite being beyond the limitation period, the court followed precedent from a ... Revocation of cancellation of GST registration of petitioner - HELD THAT:- The revenue has not challenged any of such orders of this Court and hence the orders have attained finality. In view of the fact that this Court has been consistently following the directions issued in the case of TVL. SUGUNA CUTPIECE CENTER VERSUS THE APPELLATE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) (GST), THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CIRCLE), SALEM BAZAAR. [2022 (2) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] and the Revenue/Department has also accepted the said view as evident from the fact that no appeal has been filed in any of the matters, this Court intends to follow the above order of this Court. This Court is of the considered opinion that the benefit extended by this Court in the earlier orders referred to above in Suguna Cutpiece Centre, may be extended to the Petitioner. Petition allowed. Issues involved: The petition seeks to quash the order of cancellation of Registration in Reference No.ZA331119091311U, dated 21.11.2019 and requests direction to revoke the cancellation of Petitioner's GSTIN.33BTSPM3665D1ZH.Summary:Issue 1: Appeal rejection based on limitation periodThe Petitioner, unaware of the cancellation of Registration Certificate, learned about it later and filed an appeal which was rejected by the appellate authority citing it was beyond the limitation period. The learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that similar circumstances in previous cases led to directions being issued for filing returns, paying defaulted tax with interest, and other conditions within a specified time frame.Issue 2: Legal sustainability of rejectionThe Senior Standing Counsel for the Respondents contended that the appellate authority must adhere to the prescribed limitations and the rejection of the appeal beyond the limitation period is legally sustainable. The consistent view taken in similar matters by the Court, with no challenges from the revenue, indicates finality of previous orders.Judgment:The Court noted the consistent approach in previous cases and the acceptance of the same by the Revenue/Department, as evidenced by the lack of appeals filed. Following the directions issued in the case of Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece, the Court extended the benefits to the Petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed on the same terms as mentioned in the earlier order, with no costs imposed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
