Jesu Navin Nishchal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner, a proprietary concern, has impugned the order dated 15.09.2023. The first respondent, by this impugned order, has cancelled the petitioner's GST Registration on the ground that the petitioner has failed to furnish Returns for the period 2021-22. The petitioner has applied for revocation of the cancellation of the registration, and the first respondent has rejected even this application by the order dated 05.07.2024 observing that the petitioner's response is not within the time specified.
The petitioner's case is that a similar proceeding was initiated for the tax period between March and August 2023, but the proceedings were dropped and the cancellation of the registration revoked when the petitioner filed its returns. Mr. E. I. Sanmathi, the learned counsel for the HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30915 petitioner, relying upon these circumstances canvasses that if the first respondent had extended an opportunity either with ensuring that the Show Cause Notice was served on the petitioner or while considering the petitioner's application for revocation, the petitioner could have filed returns showing bona fides and failure in these regards has resulted in a denial of reasonable opportunity.
Mr. K. Hema Kumar submits that the petitioner, as a registered taxpayer is under an obligation to file the returns without waiting for initiation of proceedings to file the returns and that this Court may consider that this is not the first instance that the petitioner is found wanting in filing the returns. The learned Additional Government Advocate argues for a just order in the circumstances to ensure that the petitioner is prompted to file the returns as required. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30915
This Court must opine that there must be an opportunity to the petitioner to file its returns because if the returns are filed and verified, the obligations in law could be examined and the cancellation of the registration would cause complete disruption of the petitioner's business. Further, the order of cancellation and rejection of the application for revocation are without considering the reasons that could be offered by the petitioner. As such, this Court intervenes under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to pass the following: ORDER [a] The petition is allowed. [b] The first respondent's orders dated 15.09.2023 [Annexure - D] and 05.07.2024 [Annexure - F] are quashed restoring the proceedings to the stage of Show Cause Notice reserving liberty to the petitioner file response to the Show Cause HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30915 Notice dated 29.08.2023 by 13.07.2026 calling upon the first respondent to consider the cause shown and the records filed and pass just orders.
[c] The petitioner shall also deposit a cost of Rs.25,000/- with the first respondent by 13.07.2026. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
RB
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.