M/S Bheema Construction vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Held

The Court held that the petitioner has a remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, against the order of cancellation of GST registration. The Court found that the impugned order summarily dismissing the appeal on the ground of maintainability, in view of the availability of the remedy of revocation under Section 30 of the CGST Act, was contrary to Sections 107 and 30 of the CGST Act. The Court accepted the petitioner's explanation for not seeking revocation within the stipulated period of 30 days under Section 30, attributing it to the Covid-19 pandemic, and deemed it valid. The Court directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's claim for revocation of the cancellation order in accordance with law, subject to the petitioner paying any outstanding due taxes. The impugned order dated 29.03.2022 was set aside, and Respondent No. 2 was directed to pass an appropriate order within two weeks.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Bheema Construction, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Respondent No. 1) canceling its GST registration. The petitioner sought to quash this order and direct Respondent No. 2 (Commercial Tax Officer) to revoke the cancellation. The petitioner contended that it could not prefer an appeal within the prescribed period due to bonafide reasons, sufficient cause, and unavoidable circumstances, specifically mentioning the Covid-19 pandemic. The petitioner also stated that it had paid all taxes due up to the date of cancellation and for the subsequent period, and had deposited certain amounts with the respondents.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 is available against the order of cancellation of GST registration passed by Respondent No. 1? 2. Whether the petitioner's failure to file an appeal within the prescribed period, due to reasons attributed to the Covid-19 pandemic, constitutes sufficient cause for condonation of delay and reconsideration of its request for revocation of GST registration cancellation? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that its inability to file an appeal within the stipulated time was due to bonafide reasons, sufficient cause, and unavoidable circumstances, including the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. They relied on several judgments, including DEEPAK VASUDE ASRANI CHUGH HUF V/S JOINT COMMISSIONER OF GST APPEALS –II, BANGALORE and AARCITY BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED V/S UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents contended that the petition had no merit and was liable to be dismissed.