M/S.Vijay Bharath Constructions Private Limited vs. The Superintendent Of Central Tax
Held
The High Court, following the principle of parity and noting that similar writ petitions with identical grievances had been allowed by the Court, set aside both the order of cancellation of GST registration dated December 27, 2018, passed by the first respondent, and the appellate order dated May 2, 2022, passed by the second respondent. The Court remitted the matter back to the file of the first respondent for a fresh decision in accordance with law. The petitioner was to be given due opportunity of hearing. The Court explicitly stated that there shall be no order as to costs. No issues were expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Vijay Bharath Constructions Private Limited, a construction company, had its GST registration cancelled by the Superintendent of Central Tax (first respondent) on December 27, 2018, following a show cause notice issued on November 30, 2018. The petitioner filed a reply on December 11, 2018. An appeal filed by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner (Appeals-II) (second respondent) was rejected on May 2, 2022, on the grounds of being barred by limitation. The petitioner then filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging both the cancellation order and the appellate order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order of cancellation of GST registration dated December 27, 2018, passed by the first respondent, and the appellate order dated May 2, 2022, passed by the second respondent, are illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice, unsustainable in law, and without jurisdiction? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were illegal and unsustainable. While specific arguments are not detailed, the petition seeks to set aside the orders. Revenue's Contention: The second respondent rejected the appeal on the grounds of limitation, implying that the petitioner failed to file the appeal within the prescribed time limit. No specific arguments from the revenue regarding the merits of the cancellation are recorded.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[ 32e5 ] Between: M/s.Vijay Bharath Constructions Private Limiled, 24-6412, Vishnupuri Colony, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500047 Represented by its Managing Director, Sri.Srinadhuni Satya Krishna. ...PETITIONER AND 1 . The Superintendent of Central Tax, Malkajgiri Range, Medchal, GST Commissionerate, PIot No. 16 and 21, Aditya Towers, Bowenpally, Hyderabad, Telangana - 50001 1. 2. The Additional Commissioner (Appeals-ll), O/o The Commissioner (Appeals-ll)7th Floor, GST Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hydera bad, Telangana - 500004. 3. The State ofTelangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department(CT), Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.
The Union of lndia, Represented by its Finance Secretary, North Block, New Delhi l loool ...RE'P.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus setting aside the impugned appeal rejection order dated 02.05.2022, passed by the second respondent in Appeal No.5412021 (MD) GST/323, in Order -in-Appeal No. HYD-GST-MD- AP2-20-22-23
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 Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.