M/S. Lakshminarayana Cottons vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax (GST)
Held
The Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, disposed of the writ petition. The 2nd respondent was directed to verify the application dated 07.09.2020, filed by the petitioner under Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017, for revocation of GST registration cancellation. The authority was further directed to take appropriate action and pass appropriate orders as per law. This action was to be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No order as to costs was made.
Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Telangana, seeking a direction for the 2nd respondent (a GST authority) to pass orders on their application dated 07.09.2020. This application was filed under Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017, requesting the revocation of the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration. The registration had been cancelled by the 2nd respondent on 15.03.2019, citing contravention of Section 39 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's grievance was the inaction of the GST authority in deciding their revocation application.
Key Issues
1. Whether the 2nd respondent has failed to perform its statutory duty by not passing orders on the petitioner's application for revocation of GST registration cancellation, filed under Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017, within a reasonable time? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the 2nd respondent's inaction on their application dated 07.09.2020, filed under Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017, for revocation of GST registration cancellation, constitutes a failure to act as per law. They sought a direction for the authority to decide the application. Revenue's contention: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents appeared before the court. No specific arguments or contentions on behalf of the revenue regarding the merits of the case or the delay in passing orders were recorded in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Rule 23, Section 39
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI AND HON’BLE MS JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.7733 of 2021
ORDER : (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.V.Sesha Sai)
Heard Sri G. Narendra Chetty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Suresh Kumar Routhu, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents.
The only grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition as evident from a reading of the supporting affidavit is the inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in passing orders on the application of the petitioner dated 07.09.2020 filed under Rule 23 of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 (for short “CGST Rules, 2017), wherein the petitioner herein made a request for revocation of cancellation of the registration. The 2nd respondent herein by way of Reference Number: ZA370319014401V, dated 15.03.2019 cancelled the registration of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner contravened the provisions of Section 39 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act 2017. By way of an application, dated 07.09.2020, the petitioner made a request, requesting the 2nd respondent to revoke the said cancellation.
Having heard the learned counsel
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.