M/S Mohammad Qayum Ansari Represented Through Its Proprietor Mohammad Qayum Ansari vs. The Principal Commissioner Of CGST And Cx

Held

The Court considered the submissions of both parties and noted that the petitioner's GST registration was cancelled for non-compliance with Section 29(2)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act, and their subsequent appeal was rejected as time-barred under Section 107(1) and (4). However, the Court took into account Notification No. 3/2023-Central Tax, dated 31.03.2023, issued by the CBIC. This notification, being beneficial in nature, provides a special procedure for revocation of cancelled registrations for a class of registered persons, including those whose appeals against cancellation orders were rejected on grounds of delay. The notification allows such persons to apply for revocation of cancellation up to June 30, 2023, provided they furnish all due returns up to the effective date of cancellation and pay any outstanding tax, interest, penalty, and late fees. The Court held that the impugned orders of cancellation and affirmation in appeal should not impede the proper officer from considering the petitioner's prayer for revocation in terms of Notification No. 03/2023. The ratio decidendi is that beneficial notifications issued to ameliorate difficulties faced by taxpayers should be given effect to, even if prior orders were passed on technical grounds like limitation, provided the conditions of the notification are met.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Mohammad Qayum Ansari, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 08.12.2022 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & CX, Ranchi, which dismissed their appeal on grounds of delay. This appeal was against the order dated 07.10.2021 passed by the Superintendent of CGST & CX, Daltonganj Range, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration for failure to furnish returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner sought to quash both orders and declare that the limitation period for appeals under Section 107 of the CGST Act should not preclude them from filing an appeal due to circumstances beyond their control. The respondents are the Principal Commissioner of CGST & CX, Ranchi, the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), and the Superintendent of CGST & CX, Daltonganj Range.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated 08.12.2022 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) dismissing the petitioner's appeal on grounds of delay, without considering the factual matrix preventing timely filing, is liable to be quashed, in light of Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? 2. Whether the order dated 07.10.2021 passed by the Superintendent of CGST & CX cancelling the petitioner's GST registration for continuous non-furnishing of returns for six months is liable to be quashed? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that Notification No. 03/2023-Central Tax, issued on 31.03.2023, provides a beneficial window for registered persons whose GST registration was cancelled on or before December 31, 2022, to apply for revocation of cancellation until June 30, 2023, even if they failed to apply within the prescribed time under Section 30. This notification, they contended, also covers cases where appeals were rejected on grounds of delay, as per its explanation. They are ready to comply with the conditions stipulated in the notification, including furnishing due returns and making payments. They relied on Notification No. 03/2023-Central Tax. Respondents' arguments: The respondents, while not having filed a counter-affidavit, acknowledged the existence of Notification No. 3/2023 dated 31.03.2023 and stated that the petitioner may avail the opportunity to seek revocation of cancellation of registration by following the prescribed conditions. They confirmed that the appeal was rejected as time-barred under Sections 107(1) and (4) of the CGST Act.