2023 (2) TMI 759

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... petitioner approaches this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with following prayers :- (B) That the order passed in Appeal no. DC/APP/E- 001/ABAD/GST/323/2022-2023 Dy. Commissioner (Appeal) Aurangabad may kindly be quashed and set aside. (C) That the order passed by the State Tax Officer dt. 14.3.2022 of cancellation of registration may kindly be quashed and set aside. (D) That, the order dt. 28.2.2022 passed by the State Tax Officer suspending the registration w.e.f. 28.2.2022 may kindly be quashed and set aside. (E) That, the Hon'ble High court may kindly hold that, the petitioner registration no.27AHQPD2485F1Z7 is valid from 28.2.20222 onwards. 3. The petitioner is a proprietary ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... penalty. The matter was taken up for hearing on 25-04-2022. Finally, the State Tax Officer rejected the application of petitioner seeking revocation of cancellation vide order dated 17-05-2022. 5. The petitioner filed appeal under section 107 of the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 challenging cancellation of registration. It was registered as Appeal No. DCST/Appl./E-001/GST-Revocation/2022- 2023/B-619. The Dy. Commissioner/State Tax (Appeal), Aurangabad Division rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation that the appeal has been submitted beyond the prescribed period provided under section 107 (1) and 107 (4) of the MGST Act, 2017. 6. Mr Alok Sharma, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the peti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation of cancellation of registration. The petitioner failed to avail the opportunity, consequently suffered the order of rejection of the application for revocation of cancellation of registration. He would further point out that petitioner failed to file appeal within prescribed period of limitation under section 107(4) of the GST Act, 2017. The appellate authority has rightly dismissed the appeal which was apparently barred by limitation. The petitioner has already availed statutory remedy. Hence, he is not entitled to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. We have considered the submissions advanced by both the sides. It appears that the petitioner was earning his livelihood th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ime will stand defeated. The petitioner deserves a chance to come back into GST fold and carry on his business in legitimate manner. 10. There is one more aspect as far as the issue regarding limitation in filing the appeal under Section 107 of MGST Act is concerned. Indeed the Deputy Commissiosner of State Tax has no power to condone the delay beyond 30 days. But then one cannot overlook the aspect of provisions stipulating limitations. The objective is to terminate the lis and not to divest a person of the right vested in him by efflux of time. 11. Since it is merely a matter of cancellation of registration, the question of limitation should not bother us since it cannot be said that any right has accrued to the State which would ra....