Abypree Associates vs. Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, AbyPree Associates, approached the High Court of Kerala aggrieved by its inability to file monthly statutory returns for August, October, November (2017), January, and February (2018). The petitioner's counsel submitted that this inability stemmed from the petitioner having wrongly opted for quarterly return filing. A representation (Ext.P2) was filed before the Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax, who is empowered under Section 39 of the CGST/SGST Acts to issue directions. The petitioner sought relief based on this representation. The respondents, represented by the Senior Government Pleader, contended that the Commissioner lacks the power to grant the relief sought, as Section 39(6) of the CGST/SGST Acts only permits extending the time for furnishing returns for a 'class of registered persons', not an individual taxpayer.

Held

The Court acknowledged the petitioner's grievance regarding the inability to file monthly returns due to a mistaken choice of quarterly filing. While the petitioner relied on the Commissioner's general powers under Section 39, the Court found considerable merit in the respondents' contention. The Court's prima facie view was that the Commissioner's power under Section 39(6) of the CGST/SGST Acts is confined to extending the time for filing returns for a 'class of registered persons' and does not extend to individual taxpayers. Despite this prima facie view, considering that the petitioner's representation (Ext.P2) was pending before the Commissioner, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed the Commissioner (3rd respondent) to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 after providing the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within two months of receiving a certified copy of the judgment. The issue of whether the Commissioner has the power to grant relief to an individual taxpayer in such circumstances was not definitively decided, but the matter was remanded for consideration.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax has the power under Section 39(6) of the CGST/SGST Acts to grant relief to an individual taxpayer who wrongly opted for quarterly return filing and is unable to file monthly returns? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the Commissioner is empowered under Section 39 of the CGST/SGST Acts to issue directions and that their representation (Ext.P2) should be considered, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case. They relied on the general power vested with the Commissioner. Revenue's Argument: The respondents contended that the Commissioner's power under Section 39(6) of the CGST/SGST Acts is strictly limited to extending the time for furnishing returns for a 'class of registered persons'. They argued that the phrase 'class of registered persons' explicitly excludes the power to pass orders in favour of an individual taxpayer.