Santanu Mondal VS The Superintendent, Central Goods

This intra-court appeal stems from a writ petition filed by the appellant, contesting a decision made on March 23, 2022, regarding Writ Petition Appeal 4910 of 2022. The initial writ petition was lodged by the appellant to challenge a ruling issued by the Additional Commissioner of CGST (Central Goods and Services Tax) and Central Excise, part of the Siliguri Appellate Commissionerate. The contested order was in response to an appeal filed by the appellant against a decision made by the Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Asansol-I Division, dated February 3, 2021. This earlier decision pertained to the rejection of the appellant’s request for the restoration of its registration.

This intra-court appeal stems from a writ petition (WPA 4910/2022) filed by the appellant challenging a decision made by the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Central Excise, Siliguri Appellate Commissionerate. The appellant’s initial appeal was against an order issued by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Asansol-I Division on February 3, 2021, which rejected the appellant’s request for the restoration of its registration.

The grounds for the rejection of the registration restoration application were primarily procedural, citing that it was submitted beyond the stipulated timeframe as mandated by statute. Notably, the appellant had filed tax returns on December 9, 2020, and January 17, 2021, and had also duly paid the assessed tax and interest as determined by the assessing authority.

This appeal seeks to contest the decision made at the appellate level, arguing against the dismissal of the registration restoration application due to procedural delays.

This intra-court appeal is lodged by the writ petitioner against the decision made on March 23, 2022, in WPA 4910/2022. The original writ petition was initiated by the appellant to contest a ruling by the appellate authority, the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Central Excise, Siliguri Appellate Commissionerate. This ruling dismissed the appellant’s appeal against the decision made by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Asansol-I Division, dated February 3, 2021. The Assistant Commissioner’s decision entailed the rejection of the appellant’s application for the restoration of its registration.

The grounds for this rejection were primarily based on the application’s submission beyond the stipulated period as per the statute. It is noted that the assessee had submitted returns on December 9, 2020, and January 17, 2021, along with the payment of taxes and interest calculated by the assessing authority.

The application to revoke the cancellation of registration, which occurred on November 29, 2019, was made on December 16, 2020. Although the appellant is not entitled to benefit from the circular issued by the Department, specifically notification no. 34 of 2021 dated August 29, 2021, and September 16, 2021, which extended the period of limitation for filing appeals under various statutes, it is argued that the appellant had made this contention before the appellate authority.

This intra-court appeal is a challenge against an order issued on March 23, 2022, in response to Writ Petition Appeal 4910/2022. The appellant initially filed a writ petition contesting an order from the Appellate Authority, the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Central Excise, Siliguri Appellate Commissionerate. This order had rejected the appellant’s appeal against a decision made by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Asansol-I Division on February 3, 2021. The Assistant Commissioner had rejected the appellant’s application for the restoration of its registration, citing that it was filed beyond the statutory period.

The appellant had filed returns on December 9, 2020, and January 17, 2021, and paid the taxes and interest as calculated by the assessing authority. The application to revoke the cancellation of registration was submitted on December 16, 2020, following the cancellation of registration on November 29, 2019. Although the appellant wouldn’t benefit from a departmental circular extending the period of limitation for filing appeals under various statutes, they argued before the appellate authority that their case should be considered.

The court, upon careful consideration, noted that the Assistant Commissioner of Asansol should have taken into account the circumstances presented by the appellant, particularly regarding the timely filing of returns and payments. However, since the Appellate Authority solely based its decision on the grounds of limitation without addressing these crucial facts, the court decided to remand the matter back to the original authority for fresh consideration.

This intra-court appeal pertains to a writ petition filed against an order issued on 23.03.2022 in WPA 4910/2022. The writ petitioner contested an order issued by the Appellate Commissioner of CGST, Central Excise, Siliguri Appellate Commissionerate, which dismissed the petitioner’s appeal against an order from the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Asansol-I Division, dated 3rd February, 2021. This earlier order rejected the petitioner’s application for the restoration of its registration, citing that the application was filed after the stipulated period under statute.

The petitioner had filed returns on 09.12.2020 and 17.01.2021, along with remitting the tax and interest as assessed by the authority. The application for revocation of cancellation of registration was submitted on 16.12.2020, seeking the restoration of registration that had been canceled on 29.11.2019. Although the petitioner was not entitled to the benefits of certain circulars issued by the Department, extending the period of limitation for filing appeals, it argued before the appellate authority that these circumstances should be considered.

The court opined that the assessing authority, the Assistant Commissioner, Asansol, should consider these facts and assess whether the appellant’s registration could be restored. Since the Appellate Authority had only considered the issue of limitation without addressing the aforementioned facts, the court deemed it appropriate to remand the matter back to the original authority for fresh consideration.

Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the orders passed by both the Appellate Authority and the Original Authority dated 3rd February, 2021, were set aside. The application for the revocation of cancellation of registration was revived and referred back to the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Assansol-I Division. The authority was instructed to provide the appellant with a personal hearing, consider the returns filed and taxes paid, and issue a fresh order within six weeks from the receipt of the server copy of the court’s order.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: