Mohan Singh vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
Two petitioners, Poonamchand Saran and Mohan Singh, challenged the cancellation of their GST registrations. Poonamchand Saran filed an e-appeal within the stipulated thirty days but failed to submit the hard copy. His appeal was dismissed as time-barred. Mohan Singh failed to file an appeal against his cancellation order within the prescribed period due to unavoidable reasons. Both petitioners argued that the cancellation of their GST registration deprived them of their livelihood, violating Article 21 of the Constitution. They sought an opportunity to file their appeals in the proper format and have them decided on merits.
Held
The Court held that the petitioners would be unable to continue their business without GST registration, thereby being deprived of their livelihood, which amounts to a violation of their right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court found that the dismissal of Poonamchand Saran's appeal on the technicality of not submitting a hard copy, despite the e-appeal being filed in time, was not justified. Similarly, the inability of Mohan Singh to file an appeal due to unavoidable reasons warranted consideration. The Court set aside the order dated 09.09.2022 in the case of Poonamchand Saran. Both petitioners were granted liberty to file appeals against the cancellation of their GST registrations within ten days from the date of the order. These appeals were to be considered and decided on all aspects in accordance with law, expressly excluding the bar of limitation. The ratio decidendi is that procedural technicalities should not lead to the denial of livelihood, and courts should grant relief when fundamental rights are impacted, allowing appeals to be decided on merits even if filed beyond the strict time limit under certain circumstances.
Key Issues
1. Whether the dismissal of the petitioner Poonamchand Saran's appeal solely on the ground of non-submission of the hard copy, despite the e-appeal being filed in time, is justified, and whether this constitutes a hyper-technical reason leading to the denial of livelihood? 2. Whether the petitioner Mohan Singh, who failed to file an appeal within the prescribed time due to unavoidable reasons, should be granted an opportunity to appeal against the cancellation of his GST registration? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners contended that they were left remediless due to hyper-technical reasons concerning the filing of appeals against GST registration cancellations. They argued that the cancellation of their GST registration prevented them from conducting business, leading to a loss of livelihood and violating their right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. They relied on judgments from various High Courts, including M/s G.G. Agencies Girijeshwar Rice Mill, Vinod Kumar, TVL. Suguna Cutpiece Centre, and M/s Trans India Carco Carriers, to support their plea for an opportunity to file appeals in the proper format. Revenue's Arguments: The respondent revenue department opposed the submissions. However, they could not dispute the legal propositions laid down in the judgments cited by the petitioners.
Sections Cited
Article 21
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 29/09/2022 Issue notice to the respondents. Shri Rajvendra Saraswat, Advocate, Standing Counsel for GST Department puts in appearance on their behalf. With consent of learned counsel for parties and looking to the urgency involved, the writ petitions are being heard and finally decided today itself. The petitioners were dealers registered under the GST Act. Their registration came to be cancelled by the competent authority vide orders dated 09.09.2022 (passed in SBCWP No.14521/2022) and 09.05.2022 (passed in SBCWP No.14524/2022). It is not disputed that appeal against cancellation of the GST registration can be filed within thirty days which can be extended by a further period of 30 days. The petitioner Poonamchand Saran filed the e-appeal in time but could not submit the hard-copy. On the other hand, the petitioner Mohan Singh failed to submit an appeal against the cancellation order dated 09.05.2022. The petitioner Poonamchand has challenged the order dated 09.09.2022 whereby his appeal has been dismissed on the ground of same being time-barred. The petitioner Mohan Singh has raised the grievance of not being able to file an appeal on account of unavoidable reasons. Learned counsel Shri Balia assisted by Mr. Sharad Kothari placed reliance on the following judgments rendered by various High Courts:-
(3 of 4) [CW-14521/2022]
M/s G.G. Agencies Girijeshwar Rice Mill vs The State of Karnataka & Ors. (Writ Petition No.15344 of 2022, decided on 18.08.2022)
Vinod Kumar Vs. Commissioner Uttarakhand State GST & Ors. : 2022 (7) TMI 128 - Uttarakhand High Court (Special Appeal Salem Bazaar : 2022 (2) TMI 933 - Madras High Court
M/s Trans India Carco Carriers Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (Circle) W.P. Nos.18537 of 2022 and etc. - Madras High Court. and urged that the petitioners have been left remediless for hyper-technical reasons of the appeal against cancellation GST registration not being filed in hard-copy/in time. He contended that owing to cancellation of GST registration, the petitioners are being deprived of the opportunity of doing business which has resulted into loss of all avenues of earning livelihood and is violative of right to life and liberty as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He thus, urges that one more opportunity deserves to be given to the petitioners to file the appeal in the proper format and the competent authority may be directed to decide such appeal as per law. Shri Saraswat, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioners’ counsel. However, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact that the legal proposition as (4 of 4) [CW-14521/2022] expounded by various High Courts in the judgments referred to supra, covers the controversy at hand. It cannot be denied that the petitioners herein would not be able to continue with their business in absence of GST registration and thus, would be deprived of their livelihood which amounts to violation of right to life and liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In this background, the order dated 09.09.2022 passed in the case of Poonamchand Saran (Writ Petition No.14521/2022) is set aside. Both the petitioners are given liberty to file appeal against the cancellation of their GST registration to the competent authority within ten days from today. Upon such appeals being filed, the same shall be considered and decided on all aspects in accordance with law excluding the bar of limitation in preferring
the appeal by the petitioners. With the above observations and directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J 98-Sudhir Asopa/-
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.