Ranjit Choudhury vs. The Principal Commissioner Of SGST And 3 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Ranjit Choudhury, a service provider, received a show cause notice for cancellation of his State GST registration. He failed to respond due to personal reasons, including medical grounds and alleged improper service of the notice. Consequently, his GST registration was cancelled by an order dated 06.07.2022. An appeal filed before the Appellate Authority was dismissed on 13.01.2023 on the grounds of limitation. The petitioner then approached the High Court seeking a direction for reconsideration of his response, which he had filed on 05.01.2023, under Section 37 of the Act, praying for restoration of his GST registration.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition in light of the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel and the prevailing notifications. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a necessary application in terms of the notifications dated 31.03.2023 and 04.04.2023, within the prescribed period ending 30.06.2023. The Court expected that such an application for revocation of the license would be considered in a fair and transparent manner, with an opportunity of hearing provided to the petitioner. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original cancellation order or the appeal, but rather facilitated a pathway for the petitioner to seek revocation under the new administrative provisions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's GST registration should be restored, considering his belated response and the dismissal of his appeal on limitation grounds. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that due to personal reasons and improper service of the show cause notice, he could not respond in time. He has since filed his returns on 05.01.2023 under Section 37 and prays for the restoration of his GST registration. Revenue's contention: The Revenue contended that the allegations of improper service were incorrect as the show cause notice was uploaded on the portal, and the petitioner's failure to respond was due to negligence. They further submitted that the Appellate Authority correctly dismissed the appeal as it was time-barred. However, the Revenue brought to the court's notice a recent notification dated 31.03.2023, adopted by the State Government on 04.04.2023, which allows persons to apply for revocation of cancellation of registration until 30.06.2023.
Sections Cited
Section 37
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 10.04.2023 Heard Shri B Pushilal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri B Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Finance and Taxation Department, Government of Assam.
Considering the subject matter in dispute and also the development which has taken place in the meantime, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.
The petitioner is a businessman engaged as Service Provider with the Department of Post. Petitioner was served with a show cause notice on certain grounds as to why the registration certificate under the State GST should not be cancelled.
It is the case of the petitioner that due to various personal reasons, including medical ground and improper service of the show cause notice, the petitioner could not respond to the same, as a result of which, the impugned order has been issued on 06.07.2022 cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner. The petitioner was also unsuccessful in preferring the appeal before the Appellate Authority which had dismissed the appeal vide order dated 13.01.2023 on the ground of limitation. The petitioner has thereafter approached this Court for a direction for reconsideration of the matter by taking on board the response filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 06.07.2022. Page No.# 3/4
Shri Pushilal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ultimately the petitioner had filed the returns on 05.01.2023 under Section 37. He, accordingly submits that the GST registration may be restored in his name.
Shri Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel submits that the allegations of improper service are incorrect as the show cause notice was uploaded in the portal itself and it is because of the sheer negligence of the petitioners that the response was not filed. He further submits that no fault can be attributed to the Appellate Authority as the appeal was barred by time. The learned Standing Counsel, however has placed on record a very recent notification of the authorities dated 31.03.2023 wherein, cases of the present nature have been taken into consideration and time up- to 30.06.2023 has been given to persons who may apply for revocation of cancellation of the registration. He submits that the petitioners can take the aid of the said notification and submit a fresh response which would be considered in terms of the aforesaid notification. Shri Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel further submits that the aforesaid notification has been adopted by the State Government vide communication dated 04.04.203 and would apply in its full force.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel, the instant writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to file necessary application in terms of the aforesaid notifications dated 31.03.2023 and 04.04.2023 in the manner prescribed therein and within the period of 30.06.2023. Since the notification itself provides for application for revocation of the license, it is expected that such application would be considered in a Page No.# 4/4 fair and transparent manner by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.