Samuel Electrical Works vs. The Appellate Authority

The petitioner’s case is thus: (a) Vide reference No.ZA3709190052890, dated 06.09.2019, the 2nd respondent cancelled the GST Registration of the petitioner w.e.f., 30.09.2018 for the reason of failure on the part of the petitioner to file returns for a period of six months prior to issuance of the show-cause notice dated 20.08.2019. (b) Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed appeal before the 1st respondent and vide order in Appeal No.SPL/VJA-II/529/2022-23, dated

2023, the appeal was dismissed the sole ground that the appeal was filed with a further delay of more than one year and as per Section 107 of the GST Act, the delay could be condoned for a period of one month and since the appeal was exceeding the limitation, the appellate authority is not vested with the powers to condone the said delay beyond 30 days. Accordingly, the appellate was rejected for admissions.

Learned counsel for petitioner, would mainly urge that the petitioner has a good ground to seek for restoration of his registration and in fact, he has mentioned the reasons for non-filing of the returns and on a technical ground that appeal was filed beyond the condonable period, the appeal was rejected and since the GST Tribunal has not been constituted under Section 109 of the CGST Act, the petitioner has no other go except invoking the juri iction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. He would thus pray to allow the writ petition and remit the matter back to the primary authority to consider the petitioner’s case and pass appropriate orders. He would rely upon the order of the Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telanganga in W.P.No.27071 of 2022, where under in similar circumstances, the writ petition was allowed

Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes-II opposed the writ petition stating that the petitioner has not filed the appeal within the time and instead filed the appeal beyond the condonable period and therefore, the 2nd respondent has rightly rejected the appeal. Therefore, order of the appellate authority suffer no legal flaw and the writ petition is not maintainable.

We perused the record and also the decision in W.P.No.27071 of 2022. In similar circumstances, learned Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana having considered the fact that GST Tribunal has not been constituted under Section 109 of the CGST Act and thereby, the petitioner could not be left without any remedy, held that it would be just and proper if the entire matter was remitted back to the 2nd respondent therein to reconsider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

Needless to emphasize that the above said decision applies with all its fours to the case on hand. The petitioner preferred appeal but it was rejected for the reasons discussed supra. In that view of the matter and as 4

With the above observation, this writ petition is allowed. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.