BharatTaxGST

M/S Chandana Studio vs. Union Of INDIA,And 4 Others

Original PDF →
WP/31435/2022HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01045292202203 August 2022Bench: SUREPALLI NANDA,UJJAL BHUYAN9 pages
For Petitioner: SRI.J.KANAKAIAHFor Respondent: SRl. B.Mukherjee FOR SRl. NAMAVARAPU, RAJESHWAR RAO (ASSGI)

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO: 31435 oF 2022 l\4/s. Chandana Studio, Rep. by Venkateshwar Rao, Aged about 54 Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad -500038. Between: AND its Partner, years, Occ. S.N.Kishore Kumar, S/o. S. Business, Rl/o. Plot No.BE 52, ,..PETITIONER 1. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary, N/inistry of Finance, lncome Tax Department, New Delhi. 2. The Princ.ipal Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, Hyderabad. 3. The Additional Commissioner (Appeal-l), Customs Central Tax Commissioner Office, 7th'Floor, GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Hyderabad. 4. I|g P"pyly / Assistant_Commissioner of Central Tax, Banjara Hilts GST Division, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, Hyderabad. ' 5. The Superintendent of Central Tax, Yousufguda Range, Banjara Hills, GST Division, Hyderabad GST Commissioner, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the natuie of the WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declare the orders of the 3rd respondent in Order- in-Appeal No.HYD-GST-HYC-APP1- 023-22-23-cST, dated 27t07t2O22 in confirming the order, dated 0710212022 in Ref.No.ZA3602220132158 passed by the sth respondent in cancelling the Registration Certificate No.36AANFC9 454B1ZC of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary to law apart from violation of Articles 14, 19(i), (g) and 21 of Constitution of lndia and consequenfly set aside the orders of the 3rd respondent in Order-in-Appeal No.HyD-GST-HYC- ! APPl-023-22-23-GST, dated 2710712022 in confirmrng the order, dated 0710212022 in Ref.No.2A3602220132158 passed by the sth respondent in cancelling the Registration Certificate No.364ANFC9 454B1ZC of the petitioner. Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the orders of the 3rd respondent in Order-in-Appeal No.HYD-GS T-HYC -APP 1 -023 -22- 23-GST, dated 27.07.2022 in confirming the order, dated 07.02.2022 in Ref. No. 2A3602220132158 passed by the Sth respondent in cancelling the Registration Certificate No.36AANFC9 454B1ZC of the petitioner, pending finalization of the writ petition. |.A.NO:2 OF 2022 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Sth respondent to allow the petitioner to file the GST returns for the yeat 2021 - 2022, pending finalization of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI.J.KANAKAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.1:SRl. B.Mukherjee FOR SRl. NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO (ASSGI) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 : SRI.B.NARASIMHA SARMA

The Court made the following ORDER LA.NO:1 OF 2022

LE THE CHIEF USTI E AI-B AND o BLE MRS. USTI E W.P.No. 31435 of 2022 ORDER, fe, rl,r lton bh rhe t.h."f Ju,rie tJjjat Rttg,tt,t Fleard tr&. J.Kanakaiah, leamed counsel for the petitioneq Mr. B.Mukherjee, leamed counsel representing leamed Assistant Solicitor Generai of India for respondent No.1 and Mr. B.Narsimha Rao, learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 5. 2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the C-onstitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of appellate order dated 27.07.2022 passed by respondent No.3 affirming the order dated 07.02.2022 passed by respondenr No.5 cancelling the registration cerlificate of the petitioner.

3.

Petitioner is a partnership finrr engaged in the business of making audio visual post production services. .Petitioner is registered under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) bearing registration No.36AANFC9454BLZC On the ground that \ petitioner did nor submit GST retums, show cause notice t dated 24.01.2022 was issued, to v,hich petitioner replied I I

ofl A3.02.2A22. Flowever, on the ground that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner at the time of hearing, registration was cancelled by respondent No.5 on 24.01.2022- Against the aforesaid order of respondent No.5, petitioner filed appeal before respondent No.

3.

By the order dated 27 .07 .2022, the appeal was dismissed.

4.

Appellate authoriry held that the only prayer made in the appeal was for revocation of registration; the order cancelling registration was not assailed; and the due date for filing of application for revocation of cancellation deed had also expired. 5 On the above grounds, the appeal vras dismissed and the order passed by respondent No.5 was affirmed. 6 Leamed counsel for the parties are in agreement that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarelycovered bya decision of this Court in W.P.No.27071' ol 2022 (M/s. Chenna Krishnama Charyulu Karampudi v Additional Commissioner (Appeals-I)) decided on 27 .a6.2022. a I ' ..)'. I I

7.

Relevant porrion of the order dated 30.06.2022 reads as under: On a query by the C-oun as to why petitioner has not approached the Goods and Seruices Tax Tribunal (GST Tribunal) under Section 1L2 of the Gntral Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Sielly,'CGST Act' hereinafter), leamed counsel for the Petitioner submia that till date no GST Tribunal has been constituted. tWe have perued the order dated 19.04.2022. This is an order passed bythe fint appellate authoriry under Section 107(1) of the CGST Acl tu per subsection (1) of Section 107 of the CGST Act, limitation for filing appeal is three momhs from the date of communication of the order appealed against. Under subsection (4) of Section 1OZ of the CGST Act, the appellate awhority may allow the appeal to be presented within a funher period of one month, provided suflicient cause is shown by the appellant. Though the lower appellate auhority may be right in hotding that while it may allow filing of an appeal beycnd the limitation of three months for a ftuther period of one month, therefore, by extension .of limitation beyond the extended period of one month delay beycnd the exended period of one ) I i i I I I I I I I I

I month cannot be condoned, we are of the view that such a stand taken by respondent No.1 may advenely affect the petitioner. This is more so because respondent No.2 had vn mltxl cancelled the GST registration of the petitioner on the ground of non- filing of retums and as GST Tribunal has not been constituted under Section 109 of the GST Act, petitioner would be left without any remedy. 'We further find that the issue pertains to cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and proper if the entire matter is remanded back to respondent No.2 to reconsider the case of the petitioner and thereafter to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. In the light of the above and without expressing any opinion on merit, we remand the matter back to the file of respondent No.2 to consider the grievance expressed by the petitioner against cancellation of GST registration and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. Needless to say, r{ren the respondent No.2 hears the matter on remand, petitioner shall submit all t"he retums as per the \ statute. I i

5

8.

Accordingly and the light of the above, order of ln respondent No.5 dated 07.02-2A22 as well as rhe order of respondenr No.3 dated 27.07.2022 are hereby set aside and quashed. Matter is remanded back to the file of respondent No.5 to consider the grievance expressed by the petitioner against cancelladon of GST registration and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. Needless to say, when respondent No.5 hears the rnatter on remand, petirioner shall submit all the returns as Per the smtute.

9.

We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on ment.

10.

This disposes of the writ petition. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand //' T.SRINIVAS DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFIGER

1.

The Secretary, Union of lndia, fi/inistry of Finance, lncome Tax Department' New Delhi.

2.

The Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, Hyderabad.

3.

The Additional Commissioner (Appeal-l), Customs Central Tax Commissioner Office, 7th Floor, GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Hyderabad. To I closed. \

/ The Deputv / Assistant Commissioner of Central.Tax' Baniara Hills GST il ii.".ii. Ti'ro " i, o i o c s r Co m m i s s i o n e ra te' H vd e ra b a d' The Suoerintenoent ot ceXIai't;;;V;;t'fs'di Range' Baniara Hills' GST ;[:; I H ;i * n u o c s r C o m m i s s i o n e r' !-lv!.q rgp a o' il;ci i;'siiJ.xnr.rnxntnH, Advocate to-P-ugl ^ . One CC to SRI.NAMAVAR|];U,RAJ|SiWNN NAO TNSSGI) [OPUC] il;;E i" Srii a NAnnsrivtrA snnrrrn, Advocate (oPUC) 4. tr c) 7 oI { \ Two CD CoPies

10.

One spare coPY S.A SW t\.tr-

( \ HIGH COURT DATED:0310812022 ORDER WP.No.31435 of 2022 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. { ( oB lHE S;I4 " () 1l AUE lrJZ? .: \1\s\r- $\H- I

Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.