Case Title | Secutech Automation (India) Private Limited Vs State Of Gujarat |
Court | Ahmedabad High Court |
Honorable judges | Justice Sonia Gokani Justice Mauna M. Bhatt |
Citation | 2022 (12) GSTPanacea 536 HC Ahmedabad R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 25011 of 2022 |
Judgement Date | 22-December-2022 |
Certainly! The summary provided outlines two main points:
Leave to amend the proposed draft amendment to the petition is permitted: This indicates that permission has been granted to make changes to a draft amendment associated with a legal petition.
The petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks to challenge and nullify an order dated 04.07.2019. This order was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Ghatak 9 (Ahmedabad), Range-3, Division-1, under section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The order pertains to the cancellation of registration of the petitioner company.
In essence, the petitioner is contesting the legality or validity of the order issued by the Assistant Commissioner regarding the cancellation of their company’s registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The petitioner, in this case, seeks to challenge an order dated 04.07.2019 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Ghatak 9 (Ahmedabad), Range-3, Division-1 under section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the Act), which resulted in the cancellation of the registration of the petitioner company. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner aims to quash this order.
The petitioner company is involved in providing automation systems in hospitals and was previously registered under section 22 of the GST Act, with its principal place of business in Mumbai. However, due to the illness and subsequent passing of Mr. S Shah, who was responsible for overseeing the company’s operations, the affairs of the company were neglected. Mr. Shah’s incapacity to manage the company’s affairs led to the inability to comply with tax obligations.
A show cause notice dated 24.05.2019, issued under Rule 22 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, was sent to the petitioner via email. The notice alleged non-compliance with tax regulations. The petitioner contends that attempts to rectify the situation were made in August 2019 when they tried to file returns in Form GSTR-3B for Gujarat. However, technical issues prevented them from doing so, and the system did not allow them to opt for returns after December 2018.
In light of these circumstances, the petitioner seeks leave to amend the proposed draft amendment to the petition. This summary highlights the key points and arguments presented by the petitioner in their attempt to challenge the cancellation of their registration under the GST Act.
discovered that the show cause notice had been issued on May 24, 2019, under Rule 22 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The petitioner, an automation systems provider for hospitals, had been registered under section 22 of the GST Act, with its main office in Mumbai. Following the illness and subsequent passing of Mr. S. Shah, who managed the company’s affairs, no arrangements were made to oversee the petitioner company’s operations.
Despite the petitioner’s regular filing of income tax returns and attempts to comply with GST regulations, it encountered difficulties when attempting to upload its GST returns for the period after December 2018, in August 2019. Upon contacting the Grievances Cell on August 5, 2019, the company was informed that its registration had been canceled effective December 31, 2018. It was revealed that Mr. S. Shah had been responsible for filing the company’s returns until his passing in March 2019, after which no one had been appointed to manage the company’s affairs.
Furthermore, the show cause notice issued in May 2019 had gone unnoticed as it was mistakenly sent to the company’s spam folder. Only upon attempting to upload the GST returns in August 2019 did the company become aware of the cancellation of its registration. Consequently, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated July 4, 2019, which canceled its registration under section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, through a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, requesting its quashing and setting aside. Additionally, leave to amend the proposed draft amendment to the petition has been granted.
The summary details a legal petition seeking to challenge the cancellation of registration of a company under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner, engaged in providing automation systems in hospitals, had its registration canceled due to non-filing of returns after the demise of Mr. S. Shah, who was managing the company’s affairs until his passing in March 2019. Despite efforts by the petitioner to rectify the situation, including contacting the Grievances Cell and attempting to upload returns, they were unable to resolve the issue due to technical and procedural hurdles.
The petitioner contends that the cancellation notice was not properly served and that they were unable to respond within the stipulated time frame due to the circumstances surrounding Mr. Shah’s death and the subsequent lack of oversight in the company. They argue that the cancellation order lacked justification and was contrary to established legal principles. Despite filing an appeal, it was dismissed on the grounds of being time-barred, which the petitioner challenges as unjust.
During the hearing, the petitioner’s advocate argued that the cancellation order was cryptic and failed to adhere to legal standards, thus warranting the petition to be allowed.
Overall, the summary presents a case where the petitioner seeks relief from the cancellation of their registration under GST laws, citing extenuating circumstances and procedural irregularities as grounds for their appeal.
The summary outlines a legal petition filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution seeking to challenge an order dated 04.07.2019, which canceled the registration of a company under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the Act). The petitioner, a company engaged in providing automation systems in hospitals, was registered under the GST Act with its principal place of business in Mumbai. The petitioner’s affairs were managed by Mr. S Shah, who became unwell and subsequently passed away in March 2019, leaving the company without anyone to oversee its operations.
The petitioner received a show cause notice on 24.05.2019, regarding the cancellation of its registration, which was sent via email. However, due to various circumstances including Mr. Shah’s illness and subsequent demise, the company failed to respond to the notice in time. Attempts to rectify the situation were made in August 2019, but the system did not permit filing returns after December 2018. It was only later discovered that the registration had been canceled effective from December 31, 2018.
Despite filing an application challenging the revocation and cancellation of registration, the petitioner’s appeal was dismissed on the grounds of being time-barred, as it was filed over two years after the stipulated 30-day period.
During the legal proceedings, arguments were made by both the petitioner’s advocate and the Assistant Government Pleader representing the respondents. The petitioner contends that the order to cancel registration was cryptic and did not adhere to legal standards.
Additionally, it is noted that there was no calculation of tax involved in the proceedings, which further complicated the situation. By the time the petitioner became aware of the lapse, the appeal period had already expired.
In conclusion, the petitioner seeks leave to amend the proposed draft amendment to the petition, citing various procedural irregularities and seeking redress under the law.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit:
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law: