2023 (10) TMI 150 - HC - GST

Judicial Intervention Reinstates GSTN Registration Beyond Limitation Period, Emphasizing Procedural Fairness and Tax Compliance

HC allowed petitioner's writ petition challenging GSTN registration cancellation. Despite appeal being beyond limitation period, court followed previous ... Revocation of cancellation of petitioner's GSTN registration - appeal rejected on the ground that it was beyond the period of limitation - HELD THAT:- There is a consistent view taken in these matters. 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's case, may be extended to the Petitioner. The impugned order is quashed and the respondents shall follow the same directions mentioned in Suguna Cutpiece Centre - Petition disposed off. Issues:The issues involved in the judgment are the quashing of an order canceling the petitioner's GSTN registration and the direction to revoke the cancellation.Judgment Summary:Cancellation of GSTN Registration:The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash the order canceling their GSTN registration. The petitioner claimed they were unaware of the cancellation until informed by other taxpayers. The appellate authority rejected the appeal as it was beyond the limitation period. The petitioner cited a previous case where similar directions were issued by the court, allowing the petition subject to conditions related to filing returns, paying taxes, and utilizing Input Tax Credit.Legal Validity of Appeal Rejection:The respondent argued that the appellate authority must adhere to the prescribed limitations and thus the rejection of the appeal beyond the limitation period was legally valid. The court noted a consistent view taken in similar matters where the revenue did not challenge the court's orders, leading to the finality of those orders. The court decided to follow the directions issued in a previous case and extend the benefit to the petitioner.Court's Decision:The court quashed the impugned order and directed the respondents to follow the directions mentioned in the previous case, providing relief to the petitioner. The court emphasized that the revenue department had accepted the court's view by not filing any appeals in similar matters. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed without any costs incurred.This summary encapsulates the key issues, arguments, and the final decision of the court regarding the quashing of the order canceling the petitioner's GSTN registration and the subsequent directions provided to the respondents.