Surajit Barman vs. Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Surajit Barman, engaged in security services, challenges the cancellation of his GST registration by the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax, Guwahati-C, Assam, via an order dated 16.12.2020. The petitioner claims the cancellation was done without personal notice, with a show cause notice dated 30.04.2020 being uploaded to the department's website on the same day the registration was suspended. The petitioner argues this violated natural justice and GST provisions. He further states that by the time he became aware of the suspension and cancellation, the period for filing an application for revocation of cancellation under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, had expired. The petitioner has since deposited all his dues and updated returns.
Held
The Court held that the Supreme Court's order dated 10.01.2022, which excluded the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for limitation purposes in judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings, was applicable. The order for cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was issued on 30.04.2020, and the period for filing a revocation application also fell within this extended period. Therefore, the departmental authority should have taken cognizance of the Supreme Court's order and permitted the petitioner to file for revocation. The Court also noted that keeping the petitioner within the GST regime would ensure compliance with statutory obligations, which is in the interest of revenue. Consequently, the impugned order dated 16.12.2020 was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the departmental authority for reconsideration of the petitioner's prayer for revocation. The Court directed the Superintendent to intimate the petitioner of any outstanding statutory dues, which, upon payment, would lead to the revocation of the GST registration cancellation. The petitioner would then be required to continue depositing statutory dues periodically.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration by the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax, Guwahati-C, Assam, was in violation of the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and its Rules, due to the alleged lack of personal notice and the manner of issuing the show cause notice. 2. Whether the period of limitation for filing an application for revocation of GST registration cancellation should be extended in light of the Supreme Court's orders concerning the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing the petitioner to pursue revocation despite the expiry of the statutory period. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contends that the cancellation order was passed without proper notice, violating natural justice. He argues that the show cause notice was uploaded to the website on the same day his registration was suspended, and he was unaware of it until the limitation period for revocation had passed. He relies on the Supreme Court's orders extending limitation periods due to the pandemic. Revenue's Arguments: The learned standing counsel for the GST fairly submitted that similar matters have been disposed of by other Co-ordinate Benches and this writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of similar directions.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 29(2), Section 30, Rule 22(1), Rule 21A(2A)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Date : 03.02.2023 Heard Mr. R. S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned standing counsel for the GST.
This writ petition is filed impugning the order dated 16.12.2020 passed by the respondent No. 4, namely, the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax, Guwahati-C, Assam whereby the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled in terms of the provisions of Section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. The petitioner is engaged in the business of providing manpower for security services under the name and style of “M/s Sun Securities Services” having its principal place of business at House No. 211, R.G. Baruah, Road, AIDC, District- Kamrup(M), Assam. According to the petitioner, the order of cancellation of the GST registration was passed without any notice to the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner came to be informed that a notice to show cause was issued to the petitioner in Form GST REG-17 vide Reference No. ZA1804200042074 dated 30.04.2020. The said show cause was purportedly issued under Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rules 22(1) and Rules 21A(2A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. However, vide the said notice, the GST registration of the petitioner was suspended on 30.04.2020 itself, namely, the date of issuance of the show cause notice. The petitioner is aggrieved that there was no personal notice served upon the petitioner prior to suspension and cancellation of the GST registration rather a notice was simply uploaded in the website of the department. According to the petitioner, such actions of the Page No.# 3/5 respondent authority are in complete violation of the Rules of natural justice as well as the provisions of the GST Act and the Rules. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this action of the respondent authorities is punitive in nature and has the effect of putting the business of the petitioner to a complete halt as without the GST registration he is unable to continue with his business as it is only source of his livelihood.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that pursuant to the cancellation of the GST registration, he had deposited all his dues under GST and updated his returns. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that since there was no personal notice served on the petitioner he came to be aware subsequently that his GST registration has been suspended and that a notice to show cause was issued by respondent No.
However, the said notice was put up only on the website of the department and, therefore, by the time the petitioner became aware of the suspension of his GST registration and subsequent cancellation of GST registration, the period of limitation as prescribed under the Act had already elapsed for filing an application for revocation of the cancellation of GST registration under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017. No appeal could be filed before the Appellate Authority as the time prescribed under the statute elapsed. It is, therefore, submitted that there being no other alternative remedy available to the petitioner, the present writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate writ, direction and orders from this Court to the respondent authorities. It is further submitted that the petitioner had already deposited the statutory dues.
The learned standing counsel has fairly submitted that there are orders passed by the other Co-ordinate Benches in respect of the cancellation of GST registration and, therefore, this writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of similar directions.
Page No.# 4/5
The learned counsels for the parties have been heard. Pleadings on record have also been duly perused. The Apex Court by the order dated 10.01.2022 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 21/2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 with Miscellaneous Application No. 29/2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020, in view of the COVID-19 Pandemic situation which had severely affected the world including the country, had extended the period of limitation. In terms of the order dated 10.01.2022 of the Apex Court, the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 stood excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any General or Special Laws in respect of Judicial or Quasi Judicial proceedings and the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any shall become available w.e.f. 01.03.2022. 7. From the pleadings, it is seen that the order for cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner was issued on 30.04.2020. It is apparent that the order for cancellation of GST registration was passed on 30.04.2020 and the application for revocation of cancellation was required to be filed within 30(thirty) days therefrom as per the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017. Both these periods fall within the period mentioned in the Apex Court’s order dated 10.01.2022. Accordingly, it was incumbent on the departmental Authority to take note of the Apex Court’s order regarding Cognizance for extension of limitation and thereafter to permit the petitioner to file necessary application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner.
There is another aspect required to be noticed. If the petitioner is not included within the GST regime, then any statutory dues that may be required to be deposited by the petitioner may not be deposited and which will not be in the interest of the revenue. Therefore, in order that the petitioner is required to comply with his statutory obligations of payment of taxes under the GST regime, it would
Page No.# 5/5 be necessary for the departmental authorities to re-consider the prayer of the petitioner for revocation of his cancellation of GST registration keeping in view the orders passed by the Apex Court regarding extension of limitation. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 16.12.2020 is hereby interfered with and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the departmental authority to re-consider his prayer for revocation of cancellation of GST registration.
It is directed that the respondent No. 4, namely, the Superintendent, Central Goods & Service Tax, Guwahati-C, Assam will intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues standing in the name of the petitioner till the date on which his GST registration was cancelled. Upon such intimation, if any such outstanding statutory dues under GST are required to be paid, the same shall be deposited by the petitioner without fail. Upon such payment of statutory dues under the GST by the petitioner, the cancellation of the GST registration in respect of the writ petitioner shall be revoked by the respondent authorities. Upon such revocation, the petitioner will continue to deposit his statutory dues periodically as mandated by the CGST Act, 2017. 10. With this direction, the writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above. No cost.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.