Devaraj Kathammal vs. The Superintendent Of CGST And C.Excise

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 the Revenue/Department had accepted this view by not filing appeals in similar matters. Therefore, the Court felt it appropriate to extend the same relief to the present petitioner. The operative directions are those laid out in paragraph 229 of the Suguna Cutpiece order, which include conditions for filing pending returns, payment of tax, interest, fine, and fees, restrictions on Input Tax Credit utilization, and revival of registration upon compliance. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Devaraj Kathammal, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of their GST registration by the Superintendent of CGST and Central Excise. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to file Goods and Services Tax monthly returns for a continuous period of six months, as per Section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The cancellation order was dated 26.01.2021. The petitioner contended that they were unaware of the cancellation due to medical ailments and subsequent bed rest, during which their business was managed by staff and a part-time accountant. This lack of awareness prevented them from filing an appeal within the stipulated time.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration due to non-filing of returns for six months, when the petitioner was medically incapacitated and unaware, is illegal and arbitrary, warranting interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? The petitioner argued that the cancellation was illegal and arbitrary due to their medical condition and lack of awareness, which prevented timely appeal. They relied on the precedent set by 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 specific directions for revival of registration in similar circumstances. The respondent, the Superintendent of CGST and Central Excise, did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, the cancellation order itself was based on the provisions of Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017, for non-filing of returns.