Jai Laxmi Venkatesh Granites (P.) Ltd. VS Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (SGST)

Certainly! The writ petition in question seeks to challenge and nullify a communication dated 09.02.2018 issued by the second respondent. The petitioner’s primary request is for the court to order the first and second respondents to permanently register them under both the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Act, 2017. The petitioner contends that the communication in question has adversely affected their rights and seeks judicial intervention to rectify the situation. This legal action aims to ensure compliance with the statutory provisions and secure the petitioner’s rights under the relevant tax legislation.

The petitioner in this case asserts themselves as a manufacturer and seller specializing in granites and tiles, duly registered under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, with TIN Nos. 33763306452 and 1115379 respectively. Following the enactment of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act, 2017) and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act, 2017), existing dealers were required to transition their registrations to CGST as per the transitional provisions under the new GST regime.

However, when the petitioner attempted to migrate their registration to CGST using FORM GST REG-26, they were informed that the functionality for migration through this form had been closed. Consequently, they were advised to apply for new registration under the provisions of the GST Act.

In response to this situation, the petitioner filed a writ petition which was entertained by the Court on 10th April 2018. The Court granted an interim order preventing any adverse actions against the petitioner, specifically ensuring they would not be treated as an unregistered dealer pending the resolution of their case. Subsequent hearings on the matter have been adjourned on multiple occasions, with the latest scheduled for further deliberation.

The central issue revolves around the petitioner’s right to migrate their registration smoothly under the new GST laws and the implications of the closure of the migration functionality on their business operations. The Court’s intervention seeks to clarify and potentially remedy the challenges faced by the petitioner in complying with the new GST regime without undue disruption to their business activities.

The petitioner in this case is a manufacturer and seller of granites and tiles, registered under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, with TIN Nos. 33763306452 and 1115379 respectively. Following the introduction of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act), existing dealers were required to migrate their registrations to CGST as per transitional provisions under the CGST Act, 2017.

However, when the petitioner attempted to migrate their registration using FORM GST REG-26, they were informed that the migration functionality had been closed. Consequently, they were instructed to apply for new registration under the GST Act. This prompted the petitioner to file a writ petition, which was admitted by the court on 10.04.2018. An interim order was granted, preventing any action against the petitioner for operating as an unregistered dealer until the matter was resolved. The case has since been adjourned several times and was scheduled for further hearing.

In response to the petition, the learned Government Advocate (Tax) representing respondents 1 and 3 produced a communication dated 31.07.2018 from the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Krishnagiri, to the Joint Commissioner (Legal), Chennai. The communication stated that revoking the registration was not feasible as it had been canceled by the GSTN Network. It advised taxpayers like the petitioner to approach jurisdictional Central Tax / State Tax Nodal Officers with necessary details by 31st August 2018 to facilitate completion of migration procedures.

The Government Advocate (Tax) argued that the petitioner had available remedies and could approach the designated Nodal Officers with the required documentation and application. She emphasized that any such application submitted by the petitioner before the deadline of 31.08.2018 would be duly considered by the Nodal Officer.

In summary, the petitioner’s grievance stems from the closure of the migration process under GST, leading to the necessity of applying for new registration. The court has intervened with an interim order to protect the petitioner’s interests, pending resolution of the registration issue. The government’s stance is that the petitioner still has avenues to address their registration concerns through designated authorities within the specified timeframe.

The petitioner in this case is a manufacturer and reseller of granites and tiles, registered under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 with TIN Nos. 33763306452 and 1115379 respectively. Following the introduction of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act), existing dealers were required to migrate their registrations to the new GST regime using transitional provisions outlined in the CGST Act, 2017.

However, when the petitioner attempted to migrate their registration through FORM GST REG-26, they were informed that this functionality had been closed. Consequently, they were advised to apply for new registration under the GST Act. Displeased with this development, the petitioner filed a writ petition which was accepted by the court on April 10, 2018. An interim order was granted, preventing any action against the petitioner as an unregistered dealer until the matter was resolved.

Since then, the case has seen several adjournments and was most recently scheduled for further hearing. The respondents, represented by the learned Government Advocate (Tax), presented a communication dated July 31, 2018, issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Krishnagiri, to the Joint Commissioner (Legal), Chennai. This communication noted that revoking the registration was not feasible as it had been cancelled by the GSTN Network. However, it also advised taxpayers like the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Central Tax or State Tax Nodal Officers with necessary details by August 31, 2018, to facilitate completion of migration procedures.

The Government Advocate (Tax) argued that the petitioner had a recourse available and was not without remedy, as they could submit the required details to the Nodal Officer by the specified date. Any such application would be considered by the Nodal Officer provided it was submitted on or before August 31, 2018.

In response, the petitioner’s counsel assured the court that they would submit the application with the necessary details to the concerned Nodal Officer by August 8, 2018 (the following day from the court hearing). They further requested the court to direct the Nodal Officer to promptly process their application without further delay.

After hearing arguments from both sides, the court considered the submissions and adjourned the matter for further proceedings.

In this case, the petitioner, a manufacturer and reseller of granites and tiles, was previously registered under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Following the introduction of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, existing dealers were required to migrate their registration to the new GST regime. However, when the petitioner attempted to migrate, they were informed that the migration process through FORM GST REG-26 had been closed. As a result, they were directed to apply for new registration under the GST Act.

In response, the petitioner filed a writ petition seeking relief from being treated as an unregistered dealer. The court, upon hearing the petition, granted interim protection to the petitioner, preventing any adverse action until the matter was resolved. The proceedings continued with subsequent hearings and submissions from both parties.

During the course of the proceedings, the respondents (Government Advocates for Tax) presented a communication dated 31st July 2018, which indicated that while registration revocation was not feasible due to technical reasons, the petitioner could approach jurisdictional tax officers to complete the migration process by providing necessary details before 31st August 2018.

The Government Advocate argued that the petitioner had a recourse and could rectify the situation by filing an application with the Nodal Officer before the deadline. The petitioner’s counsel assured the court that such an application would be submitted promptly.

After hearing both sides and considering the submissions, the court acknowledged that the petitioner had been a registered dealer under previous tax laws and recognized the lapse that occurred during the migration process to GST. The court directed the petitioner to file an application with all necessary details before the concerned Nodal Officer by 10th August 2018. It further instructed the Nodal Officer to review the application and issue appropriate orders within three weeks from the date of receipt.

The court also maintained the interim protection granted to the petitioner until a decision was made by the Nodal Officer, thereby ensuring continuity in their status as a registered dealer.

Finally, the court disposed of the writ petition, outlining the aforementioned directives and clarifying that no costs were to be imposed. It further closed all related miscellaneous petitions connected to the case.

In conclusion, the court’s decision provided a pathway for the petitioner to rectify their registration status under the GST regime and ensured their interim protection against adverse actions until the matter was fully resolved.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case law: