Case Title | Railsys Engineers Pvt Ltd. Vs Addnl Commissioner CGST (Appeals II) and anr. |
Sections | Section 107, 169 of CGST Act and Rule 68 of CGST Rules. |
Court | New Delhi High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju |
Citation | 2022 (7) GSTPanacea 138 HC New Delhi W.P.(C) No. 4712 of 2022 |
Judgement Date | 21- July- 2022 |
Counsel for Petitioner | Mr Sandeep Chilana Mr Priyojit Chatterjee Ms Shambhavi Sinha Mr Shekhar Sharma |
Counsel for Respondents | Mr R.Ramchandran |
Decision | In favour of Assessee |
The New Delhi High Court bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Tara VitastaGanjuhas held that sinceperiod between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022 was exempted from period of limitation by Hon Supreme Court due to COVID-19 Pandemic, it is also applicable to extendable time period too.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The Petitioneris served with a show cause notice u/s 169(1)(d) on common portal on dated 29.10.2019. SCN was neither bearing signature of any officer nor it had address of venue for personal hearing on 04.11.2019. An order for cancellation of registration was issued on 25.11.2019. Order of cancellation of registration also did not bear signatures of the concerned authority. The counsel for petitioner submitted that as per rule 68 of the CGST Rules 2017 the respondent had to issue a SCN for non-filing of returns with regard to the fact that petitioner had been regularly filing its return until February 2019 before respondent cancelling the certificate of registration under rule 22 of CGST Rules 2017.
The counsel for respondent informed Hon. Court that return for continuous period of 6 months were not filed and according to rules SCN was issued towards cancellation of registration and that procedures were adhered in totality. He contended that order of cancellation of registration dated 25.11.2019 was prior to COVID-19 pandemic break-up hence the supreme court suo-moto orders passed in relation to limitation period are not applicable.
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, Hon.Courtconsidering the various judgement passed by Hon Supreme Court in Civil case no 3/2020 held that limitation period for various civil , criminal and revenue cases to exclude period between 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 from limitation period.
In the present case Hon. Court observed that period of limitation for the notice issued on 25.11.2019 ended on 24.02.2020 and if extended by 1 month by the Commissioner on sufficient cause shown ends on 24.03.2020. Hon. Court observed that extension of limitation period is appliable to extended period allowable also,and not just to period of limitation under section 107 of the Act. Hence it quashed and set aside order in appeal dated 28.06.2021 as being contrary to the Supreme Court orders.
Hon Court also addressed the concerns of counsel of petitioner regarding non mention of venue for personal hearing, no signatures on the SCN and order by replying that recourse to video conferencing mechanism is available to petitioner and remarked to respondents that a digital signature could have been appended to SCN and order as it has grave implications for the petitioners.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
Period of limitation is applicable to extension of period allowable by the Commissioner. And that now various mechanism is available to hold hearing, if not possible in physical presence i.e virtually and documents can be athunticated by affixing digital signatures.
Download PDF
RAILSYS
For Reference Visit:
Delhi High Court