GKV Sharma Vs Union Of India

The Petitioner has filed a writ petition before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging a communication dated 29th April, 2022. This communication indicated issues such as non-payment of interest, late fees, penalties, and ineligible credit of Input Tax Credit for the period from July 2017 to January 2021.

The Petitioner’s counsel submitted that the Petitioner had previously contested an order for the cancellation of their Registration Certificate under Section 29 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act, 2017). This earlier challenge was made through a writ petition numbered W.P.(C) No.33418 of 2021. The Court addressed this petition on 1st December, 2021, making certain observations in its disposal order.

The Petitioner has filed a writ petition challenging a communication dated April 29, 2022. This communication indicated non-payment of interest, late fees, penalties, and ineligible credit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the period from July 2017 to January 2021. The petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the court’s intervention.

The Petitioner’s counsel argued that after the Petitioner’s Registration Certificate was cancelled under Section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act, 2017), they filed a writ petition (W.P.(C) No.33418 of 2021). The court disposed of this petition on December 1, 2021, with specific directions.

To comply with the court’s directions, the Petitioner paid Rs. 26,13,132 as tax, Rs. 3,63,990 as interest, and Rs. 60,000 as a penalty. The Petitioner then requested the Assistant Commissioner, GST, Central Excise & Customs to act according to the court’s order.

The Petitioner’s counsel claims that despite the Petitioner’s compliance with the court’s directions based on the statement of the learned Senior Standing Counsel, the Opposite Parties have not followed the court’s directions. Specifically, the court had directed that the proper officer should open the portal to allow the Petitioner to file the GST return, provided that the Petitioner complies with the conditions mentioned in the order.

Additionally, the counsel for the Petitioner points out that while the tax period from July 2019 to September 2019 was addressed in the earlier writ petition (W.P.(C) No.33418 of 2021), the Opposite Parties have not complied with the court’s instructions in that case either.

The Petitioner has filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a communication dated 29th April, 2022. This communication indicated the non-payment of interest, late fee, penalty, and ineligible credit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the period from July 2017 to January 2021.

Previously, the Petitioner had their Registration Certificate cancelled under Section 29 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act, 2017). The Petitioner then moved the Court in writ petition W.P.(C) No.33418 of 2021, which was disposed of on 1st December, 2021. The Court had directed the Petitioner to deposit a specified amount as tax, interest, and penalty. The Petitioner complied, depositing Rs. 26,13,132/- as tax, Rs. 3,63,990/- as interest, and Rs. 60,000/- as penalty. The Court also ordered that upon compliance, the GST portal should be reopened to enable the Petitioner to file GST returns.

Despite the Petitioner fulfilling these requirements, the Opposite Parties failed to comply with the Court’s direction to reopen the portal. Instead, a new communication on 29th April, 2022, listed the non-payment period as from July 2017 to January 2021, rather than the previously addressed period from July 2019 to September 2019, which was the subject of the earlier writ petition.

The Petitioner’s counsel argued that the Petitioner had deposited the required amounts as per the Court’s order from December 2021. Consequently, the Opposite Parties are obligated to facilitate the filing of returns by revoking the cancellation of the Registration Certificate, thereby adhering to the Court’s directive.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: