M/S Anju Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Anju Singh, a proprietorship concern registered under the UPGST Act, 2007, had its GST registration cancelled by an order dated 16.05.2019, issued by Respondent no.3. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to file returns for a continuous period of six months, as per Section 29(2) of the CGST/UPGST Act. The petitioner admits to not having filed returns. The petitioner filed a writ petition approximately three years after the cancellation order, seeking to quash the cancellation and to direct Respondent no.4 to pay dues related to work done and security amount. The petitioner did not avail the statutory remedies of revocation of cancellation under Section 30 or appeal under Section 107 of the Act.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition, as far as relief (i) is concerned (quashing the order of cancellation of registration), is not maintainable. The reasoning is that the petitioner failed to avail the statutory remedies provided under Section 30 (revocation of cancellation) and Section 107 (appeal) of the CGST/UPGST Act within the prescribed periods of limitation. The Court noted that the petitioner approached the High Court after approximately three years, without a proper explanation for the laches, thereby attempting to defeat the provisions of limitation. The ratio is that a writ petition under Article 226 cannot be used to circumvent statutory limitations for appeal or revocation when such remedies were available. For relief (ii) concerning the payment of dues, liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority or avail other remedies available under law. The Court disposed of the writ petition with these observations.
Key Issues
1. Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable to challenge an order of cancellation of GST registration after a significant delay, thereby circumventing the statutory limitations prescribed for appeal or revocation? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner sought to quash the cancellation order and compel payment of dues. The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the petitioner regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the delay. Respondent's argument: The State contended that the writ petition is not maintainable due to the petitioner's failure to avail the statutory remedies within the prescribed limitation periods and the significant delay in approaching the court without proper explanation. The State argued that filing a writ petition after the expiry of limitation periods defeats the provisions of limitation under the CGST/UPGST Act.
Sections Cited
Section 29(2), Section 30, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 241 of 2022 Petitioner :- M/S Anju Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rishi Raj Kapoor Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order of cancellation of registration dated 16.5.2019 issued by Respondent no.3 (Annexure No.4 of the Writ Petition). (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent no.4 to pay the dues of Rs.13,35,000=00 related with payment of work done and security amount of Rs.5,46,000=00 of the petitioner."
Petitioner is a proprietorship concern registered under the U.P.
Goods and Service Tax Act, 2007. The registration of the petitioner was cancelled by the impugned order dated 16.05.2019 in terms of the provisions of Section 29(2) of CGST/UPGST Act for reason that the petitioner failed to file his returns for a continuous period of six months.
It is admi
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 Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.