Taxpayer Wins GSTIN Restoration After Proving Auditor's Filing Errors Were Not Deliberate Misconduct HC found that GSTIN registration cancellation was unjustified, primarily due to auditor's errors in filing NIL returns rather than petitioner's ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Taxpayer Wins GSTIN Restoration After Proving Auditor's Filing Errors Were Not Deliberate Misconduct
HC found that GSTIN registration cancellation was unjustified, primarily due to auditor's errors in filing NIL returns rather than petitioner's intentional misconduct. The court directed restoration of GSTIN registration within two weeks and allowed petitioner to file a formal restoration application, effectively setting aside the original cancellation order.
Issues involved: Challenge to cancellation of GSTIN registration due to filing of NIL returns by the auditor instead of showing actual outwards supplies, petitioner's inability to recover invoice amount due to cancelled GSTIN.
Summary:
Challenge to Cancellation of GSTIN Registration: The petitioner, an illiterate owner-cum-driver of a lorry, challenged the cancellation of GSTIN registration by the respondent due to continuous filing of NIL returns by the auditor instead of showing actual outwards supplies. The petitioner had engaged an auditor for GST returns filing, who filed GSTR-10 after cancellation without restoring the GSTIN. The High Court observed that the cancellation was based on the auditor's actions, not the petitioner's genuine transactions. The Court set aside the cancellation and directed restoration of the GSTIN registration.
Inability to Recover Invoice Amount: Despite successfully carrying on the transport business and raising invoices, the petitioner could not recover the invoice amount due to the cancelled GSTIN. The respondent argued that by filing GSTR-10, the petitioner accepted the cancellation and should not have raised invoices. However, the Court found the petitioner's reason for raising invoices genuine, attributing the error to the auditor. The Court directed the petitioner to file a formal application for restoration of GSTIN registration, which the respondent was ordered to revoke within two weeks of application.
The Writ Petition challenging the cancellation of GSTIN registration was disposed of in favor of the petitioner, with directions for restoration.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.