Bharat Khatoi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Cx, Range V, Tollygunge Div. South Commissionerate And Ors.
Facts
The petitioner, Bharat Khatoi, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of his GST registration. The cancellation was reportedly due to non-filing of returns. The petitioner contended that he had filed the returns, albeit belatedly for three months, and was willing to file the remaining returns for another three months. He also stated that all revenue dues had been paid. The respondents included the Superintendent, CGST & CX, Range-V, Tollygunge Division, Kolkata-South Commissionerate, the Union of India, and the State.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file the pending returns within 15 days from the date of the order. The respondent authorities were directed to restore the petitioner's registration and open the portal for filing returns within 3 days. Within seven working days, the authorities were to inform the petitioner of any revenue dues, which the petitioner was to pay within seven days of receiving such intimation. If no revenue dues were found, the registration restoration would continue. However, if the petitioner failed to pay dues or file returns within the stipulated times, the CGST authority was empowered to cancel the registration in accordance with law. The Court did not explicitly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was justified on the grounds of non-filing of returns, considering the petitioner's submission that returns were filed belatedly and he was willing to file the remaining ones and had paid all dues. This issue turns on the interpretation and application of provisions related to GST registration and return filing obligations. The petitioner argued that he had made efforts to comply and was ready to rectify any deficiencies. The revenue authorities' contention is not explicitly recorded in the judgment, but their action of cancelling registration implies a stance that the non-filing constituted a sufficient ground for cancellation.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024 PB Sl. No.135. WPA 2716 of 2024 Bharat Khatoi Vs The Superintendent, CGST & CX, Range-V, Tollygunge Division, Kolkata-South Commi- ssionerate & Ors. Mr. J. Khan, Mr. B. Sengupta. … For the Petitioner. Mr. Kaushik Dey, Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree. …….for the CGST authority. Mr. P. K. Bhoumick, Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee. ……..for the UOI. Mr. A. Ray, Mr. T. M. Siddiqui, Mr. T. Chakraborty, Mr. S. Sanyal. ……for the State. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties. The main issue arises in this writ petition relates to cancellation of petitioner’s registration on the ground of non-filing of return. Petitioner submits that petitioner has filed the return in question though belatedly for three months and for another three months, he is ready and willing to file and he submits that all the revenue dues, he has paid. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the parties, this writ petition
2 being WPA 2716 of 2024 is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to file the return in question which have not been filed, within 15 days from date. Respondent authorities concerned shall restore the r
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 Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.