Pritam Nath vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 Ors.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's GST registration should be restored. The Court reasoned that the petitioner is an architect who undertakes architectural projects and is required to pay statutory dues under the CGST/SGST. If his registration remains cancelled, these dues will not be deposited, which is not in the interest of revenue. The Court noted that similar orders have been passed by the High Court and its co-ordinate benches in cases where assessees had approached the appellate authority, and their appeals were rejected. Therefore, to avoid keeping the present writ petition pending, the Court decided to dispose of it in terms of those similar orders. The Court set aside the impugned order dated January 20, 2021, and directed the Superintendent of Central Goods & Services Tax to intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues, if any. Upon payment of these dues, the respondent authority is to revoke the cancellation and restore the petitioner's GST registration.

Facts

The petitioner, Pritam Nath, an architect registered under the GST Act since September 25, 2017, failed to file GST returns for six consecutive months due to personal issues and the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, the Superintendent of Central Goods and Service Tax issued a show cause notice on December 17, 2020, proposing cancellation of his GST registration. The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled effective January 20, 2021. He filed an appeal before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) on March 31, 2023, which was also rejected. The petitioner then approached the High Court via a writ petition, citing similar orders passed by co-ordinate benches for restoration of GST registrations.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration for non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months, in light of personal difficulties and the COVID-19 pandemic, is justified, and if the petitioner's prayer for revocation of cancellation should be granted? (Question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation and application of relevant GST provisions concerning registration cancellation and the discretion of authorities). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that his failure to file returns was due to genuine personal problems and the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. He relied on orders passed by co-ordinate benches of the High Court that directed restoration of GST registrations in similar circumstances. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, GST, did not dispute that orders have been passed by co-ordinate benches directing restoration of GST registration upon complete payment of all dues. However, they noted that the order of the appellate authority was not placed on record by the petitioner.