TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 390
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing in the present petition is that by impugned order dated 24.02.2023 (Annex. 3), the GST registration certificate of the petitioner has been cancelled because of not filing of GST returns as stipulated in law. 2.1 Mr. Taimni further submits that though there is a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017 (for short 'the Act of 2017), but the same remedy is also not applicable to the present petitioner because the timeline of 30 days, which is prescribed in the remedy, is now not available to the present petitioner. 2.2 Mr. Taimni also submits that the petitioner has a constitutional right to freedom of trade and commerce, which is being jeopardized because the petitioner is not having any remedy wha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Prakash Purohit's case (supra), we are of the view that the writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed as the petitioner has sufficiently explained the reasons for filing the appeal with delay. Hence, the instant writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.09.2023 is set aside. The petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal against the cancellation of GST registration before the competent authority within ten days from today. If any such appeal is filed within the stipulated time, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same on merits in accordance with l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the appellate authority for a further period of one month subject to the satisfaction of the appellate authority that the person aggrieved was prevented by sufficient causes from presenting the appeal within a period of three months. In the present case, the petitioner has not filed appeal before the appellate authority within the prescribed limitation and has directly filed this writ petition before this Court on 14.2.2023 i.e. almost after eight months of expiry of limitation period. (15) We are of the view that after expiry of the limitation period of filing appeal, the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order is not maintainable. This view of us is getting support from the decision of the Hon'ble Suprem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ven case, the Assessee may approach the High Court before the statutory period of appeal expires to challenge the assessment order by way of writ petition on the ground that the same is without jurisdiction or passed in excess of jurisdiction by overstepping or crossing the limits of jurisdiction including in flagrant disregard of law and Rules of procedure or in violation of principles of natural justice, where no procedure is specified. The High Court may accede to such a challenge and can also nonsuit the petitioner on the ground that alternative efficacious remedy is available and that be invoked by the writ petitioner. However, if the writ petitioner chooses to approach the High Court after expiry of the maximum limitation period of 60....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me frame, therefore, the same requires consideration. 5. This Court is also conscious of the fact that the validity of Section 107 of the Act of 2017 is pending consideration as informed by Mr. Vaishnav, learned counsel for the respondents. 6. At this juncture, this Court finds that the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment rendered in the case of The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. v. M/s Commercial Steel Limited (Civil Appeal No. 5121 of 2021 decided on 03.09.2021) are relevant to the present case, and thus, relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder: "11. The respondent had a statutory remedy under Section 107. Instead of availing of the remedy, the respondent instituted a petition ....