M/S Swaroop Art vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's inability to continue with their business due to the absence of GST registration would deprive them of their livelihood, constituting a violation of their right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court found that the dismissal of the appeal solely on the ground of limitation, without considering the substantive merits and the severe consequences for the petitioner's livelihood, was not justified. The Court relied on the principle that substantive justice should prevail over technicalities, especially when fundamental rights are implicated. The Court set aside the order dated September 21, 2022, and granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal against the cancellation of GST registration within ten days. The competent authority was directed to consider and decide this appeal on all aspects in accordance with law, explicitly excluding the bar of limitation. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Swaroop Art, a dealer registered under the GST Act, had its GST registration cancelled by the competent authority on February 15, 2022. The petitioner filed an e-appeal against this cancellation on June 17, 2022, which was beyond the prescribed three-month period, extendable by 30 days. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the petitioner's appeal on September 21, 2022, solely on the grounds of it being time-barred. The petitioner challenged this dismissal order before the High Court, arguing that the dismissal for a technical reason of limitation left them remediless and deprived them of their livelihood.

Key Issues

1. Whether the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal against the cancellation of GST registration on the ground of limitation, despite the potential for significant hardship to the petitioner's livelihood, is legally sustainable, particularly in light of Article 21 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the dismissal of their appeal on hyper-technical grounds of limitation has left them remediless. They contended that the cancellation of GST registration prevents them from conducting business, leading to a loss of livelihood, which violates their fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. They relied on various High Court judgments, including M/s G.G. Agencies Girijeshwar Rice Mill vs The State of Karnataka & Ors., Vinod Kumar Vs. Commissioner Uttarakhand State GST & Ors., TVL. Suguna Cutpiece Centre vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), and M/s Trans India Carco Carriers Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (Circle). The petitioner sought an opportunity to file the appeal in the proper format and requested a direction for the competent authority to decide the appeal on merits. Respondents' Contentions: The respondents vehemently opposed the petitioner's submissions. However, they could not dispute that the legal propositions from the cited High Court judgments covered the present controversy.