Case Title | Devendra Prasad VS Assistant Commissioner, State Goods & Service Tax, Sector, 6 Dehradun and Another |
Court | Uttarakhand High court |
Honorable judges | Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra |
Citation | 2022 (12) GSTPanacea 579 HC Uttarakhand Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3263 of 2022 |
Judgement Date | 16-December -2022 |
In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks various reliefs regarding a Show Cause Notice for Cancellation of Registration issued by the Respondent No. 1. The petitioner requests the court to issue a writ, order, or direction akin to Certiorari to annul the aforementioned Notice, dated 06.11.2020 (Annexure No. 2). Additionally, they seek similar relief for an Order for Cancellation of Registration, referenced but not limited to, bearing another specified Reference No.
The petitioner has filed a writ petition seeking various reliefs from the court. Firstly, they request the quashing of a Show Cause Notice for the Cancellation of Registration and an Order for Cancellation of Registration issued by the Respondent no. 1. Additionally, they seek a mandamus directing the Respondent to revive the GST registration of the Petitioner, along with any other consequential relief deemed fit by the court.
The petitioner’s counsel argues that the issue at hand aligns with a Division Bench judgment of the Court passed in SPA No. 123 of 2022 on 20.06.2022. In this judgment, the Court determined that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, thus barring appeals under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 to the Commissioner.
On the other hand, the counsel representing the revenue contends that under Section 30 of the U.K. GST Act, the petitioner has an alternative avenue for recourse. They argue that the petitioner can file an application for the revocation of the cancellation of GST, provided they fulfill the condition of filing appropriate returns for the six months in question.
In essence, the petitioner seeks relief through the court, citing legal precedent to support their position, while the revenue argues for adherence to statutory provisions regarding the cancellation of GST registration.
The petitioner in this case has filed a writ petition seeking various reliefs, including quashing of a show cause notice and an order for the cancellation of their GST registration issued by the respondent authority. They also seek a direction to revive their GST registration and any other consequential relief deemed fit by the court.
The petitioner’s counsel argues that a Division Bench judgment of the court has established that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, rendering appeals under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act inapplicable to the Commissioner.
On the other hand, the revenue’s counsel contends that according to Section 30 of the U.K. GST Act, the petitioner has the option to file an application for revocation of the cancellation of GST registration, provided they submit appropriate returns for the six months during which they failed to do so as per the relevant rules.
The court notes that the petitioner failed to furnish returns for six consecutive months, leading to the issuance of a show cause notice. Consequently, the court directs the petitioner to file an application for revocation under Section 30 of the CGST Act, waiving the limitation period and mandating compliance within 21 days. The petitioner must also submit returns for the defaulted six months and any further completed months after the revocation. If any dues are found to be owed by the petitioner and are duly paid, the revenue is instructed to consider the case liberally and dispose of it within 30 days.
Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of in accordance with these directives.
The petitioner has filed a writ petition seeking several reliefs, including quashing a Show Cause Notice and an Order for Cancellation of Registration issued by the Respondent. They also seek a Mandamus directing the Respondent to revive their GST registration and any other consequential relief deemed necessary.
The petitioner’s counsel argues that the issue is addressed in a Division Bench judgment of the Court, which stated that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, thereby ruling out the possibility of appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 to the Commissioner.
The revenue’s counsel contends that under Section 30 of the U.K. GST Act, the petitioner has the option to file an application for revocation of the cancellation of GST registration, provided they file appropriate returns for the six months during which they failed to upload returns to the GST Department portal as per relevant rules.
As the petitioner failed to furnish returns for six consecutive months and a show cause notice was issued, the Court directs them to file an application for revocation under Section 30 of the CGST Act, with a waiver of the limitation period. The petitioner is given 21 days to file the application for reviving GST registration and is instructed to comply with other provisions of Section 30, including submission of returns for the defaulted six months and any subsequent completed months after revocation. If dues are found to be due and paid, the revenue is instructed to consider the case liberally and dispose of it within 30 days. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit:
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law: