Rajalingam.R vs. The Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeals)
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, extending the benefit granted in the case of Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Vs The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) and others. The Court noted that it had consistently followed the directions issued in the Suguna Cutpiece case and that the Revenue had accepted this view by not filing appeals in similar matters. Therefore, the Court ordered that the petitioner be granted the same relief as provided in paragraph 229 of the Suguna Cutpiece judgment. This relief includes directions for the petitioner to file pending returns with tax, interest, fine, and fees, with specific conditions regarding the utilization of Input Tax Credit. Upon compliance, the registration is to be revived forthwith. The respondents are also directed to take steps to enable the filing of returns and payment of dues on the GST portal.
Facts
The petitioner, R. Rajalingam, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Joint Commissioner of GST (Appeals) dated 16.09.2022, which rejected his appeal against the cancellation of his GST registration. The registration was cancelled by the Superintendent, Dindigul (Rural) on 16.02.2022, effective from 21.01.2022, for failure to file monthly GST returns. The petitioner contended that due to the COVID pandemic, there were no business transactions, leading to the non-filing of returns. He was unable to file an application for revocation of the cancellation within the prescribed time, prompting him to file an appeal. The appellate authority rejected the appeal on grounds of limitation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's GST registration was liable to be cancelled for non-filing of returns, under Section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? 2. Whether the appellate authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's appeal on the ground of limitation, considering the circumstances of non-filing of returns? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the non-filing of returns was due to the COVID pandemic and the absence of business transactions. He relied on a previous judgment of this Court in Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Vs The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) and others (W.P.Nos.25048, 25877, 12738 of 2021 etc., batch), dated 31.01.2022, which provided directions for revival of registration in similar circumstances. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (Revenue).
Sections Cited
Section 29
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.11.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and W.M.P.(MD)No.19992 of 2022 R.Rajalingam
... Petitioner Vs.
The Joint Commissioner of GST (Appeals), Office of the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Appeals), No.4, Lal Bahadur Shashtri Marg, C.R.Buildings, Madurai – 600 002. 2. The Superintendent, Dindigul (Rural), Batlagundu Range, Dindigul – IV Range Office, No.5/112, NGO Colony, Balakrishnapuram Pudur, Dindigul – 624 005. ... Respondents _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1st Respondent made in impugned order-in-Appeal No.MAD- CGST-JTC-APP-088
dated
2022
bearing
DIN
No. 20220959KV000000AEE9D rejecting the Petitioner's Appeal No.94 of 2022 – GSTMDU (online AD3309220058553. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Suresh For Respondents
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 Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.