M/S Padma Laxmi Brick And Anr. vs. The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/S Padma Laxmi Brick, a proprietorship firm, and its proprietor, Sarat Das, had their GST registration cancelled by an order dated 02.04.2022. The cancellation followed a show cause notice to which the petitioners claim they could not respond due to personal reasons and improper service. Their subsequent appeal to the Appellate Authority was dismissed on grounds of limitation. The petitioners approached the High Court seeking a direction for reconsideration of their response to the show cause notice. The revenue contended that the show cause notice was properly uploaded on the portal and the petitioners' failure to respond was due to negligence. The Appellate Authority's decision was also justified as the appeal was time-barred.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file a necessary application in terms of the notification dated 31.03.2023 by 30.06.2023. The Court noted the submission of the learned Standing Counsel that the State Government had adopted the said notification and it would apply in full force. The Court expected that such an application for revocation of license would be considered in a fair and transparent manner, with an opportunity of hearing granted to the petitioners. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original show cause notice or the propriety of the cancellation order, but rather facilitated a procedural remedy based on the subsequent notification.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners' failure to respond to the show cause notice was due to reasons beyond their control, warranting reconsideration of their response? 2. Whether the petitioners can avail the benefit of the notification dated 31.03.2023 issued by the authorities for revocation of cancellation of registration, given that it was issued by the Central Government and its applicability to the State Government was questioned? Petitioner's argument: The petitioners argued that personal reasons and improper service of the show cause notice prevented them from responding. They expressed willingness to submit a reply, which they requested be considered in accordance with law. They also questioned the applicability of the Central Government's notification to the State Government. Revenue's argument: The revenue contended that the show cause notice was uploaded on the portal, and the petitioners' non-response was due to their negligence. They argued that the Appellate Authority correctly dismissed the appeal as it was barred by limitation. The revenue also submitted that the notification dated 31.03.2023 had been adopted by the State Government and would apply fully, allowing the petitioners to apply for revocation of cancellation.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 03.04.2023 Heard Ms. N Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioners. 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 no. 1 is a Proprietorship Firm in the name and style of M/S Padma Laxmi Brick and the petitioner no. 2 is the proprietor of petitioner no.
Petitioner no. 2 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 petitioners that due to various personal reasons and improper service of the show cause notice, the petitioners could not respond to the same, as a result of which, the impugned order has been issued on 02.04.2022 cancelling the GST registration of the petitioners. The petitioners were also unsuccessful in preferring the appeal before the Appellate Authority which had dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation. The petitioners have thereafter approached this Court for a direction for reconsideration of the matter by taking on board the response filed by the petitioners against the impugned order dated 02.04.2021. 4. Ms. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the show cause
Page No.# 3/4 notice could not be responded because of reasons beyond the control of the petitioners. She submits that the petitioners are, however ready and willing to submit the reply to the show cause notice which may be considered in accordance with law.
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.
At this stage, Ms. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the notification, in question is by the Central Government and she apprehends whether the same would be applicable to the State Government.
Shri Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel submits that there is instruction that the aforesaid notification has been adopted by the State Government 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 petitioners to file necessary application in terms of the aforesaid notification dated 31.03.2023 in the manner prescribed therein and within the period of Page No.# 4/4 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 fair and transparent manner by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
A copy of the notification dated 31.03.2023 is made a part of the record.
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.