Fathima Khatoon vs. The Superintendent Central Tax

WP/32724/2022HC TelanganaGSTCNR HBHC01047133202218 August 2022Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN6 pages

For Petitioner: SRl. T. NARENDRA KUMARFor Respondent: MS. SAPNA REDDY FOR, SRI B. NARASIMHA SARMA

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Khatoon, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated January 6, 2022, passed by the Superintendent, Central Tax (Respondent No. 1), cancelling her GST registration. The cancellation was based on a show cause notice dated December 2, 2021, to which the petitioner replied on January 2, 2022. The respondent's opinion was that the petitioner's GST registration was liable for cancellation due to failure to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months. The cancellation was made effective from January 6, 2022. The petitioner sought to quash this order and revive her GST registration, allowing her to file returns for the period post-January 2022.

Held

The Court set aside the order dated January 6, 2022, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration. The matter was remanded back to Respondent No. 1, the Superintendent, Central Tax. The respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's grievance against the cancellation and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law. This must be done after providing the petitioner with a due opportunity of hearing. The Court also directed that this decision should be taken within a period of four weeks from the receipt of a copy of the order. The Court relied on its previous decisions in Nithya Constructions v. Union of India and M/s. Chenna Krishnama Charyulu Karampudi v. Additional Commissioner, Appeals.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order of cancellation of GST registration dated January 6, 2022, passed by the Superintendent, Central Tax, is without jurisdiction, barred by limitation, and contrary to law and principles of natural justice, thereby violating Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the cancellation order was without jurisdiction, ex-facie barred by limitation, and not in accordance with the law. It was also argued that the order was arbitrary and violated the principles of natural justice. The petitioner clarified that unlike in the cited case of Nithya Constructions, she had not filed an appeal. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records that the learned counsel for the parties were in agreement that the issue was covered by the decision of the Court in Nithya Constructions v. Union of India. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue beyond this agreement.

Sections Cited

Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 32724 OF 2022 Between: fgltiT, Khatoon, 8-2-598/8/10, Road No.8, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500034. AND ...PET|TIONER 1. The Superintendent Central Tax, Jubilee Hills -ll, Banjara Hill Division, Hyderabad - 500 034. 2. The Superintendent - Central Tax, Punjagutta Range, Ameerpet Division, Hyderabad - 500 073. 3. The Assistant Commissioner - State Tax, Jubilee Hills -ll, Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 4- The Union of lndia, Through the Secretary, Ir/iinistry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi -1 10001. 5. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, (Revenue CT-ll), Secretariat, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS 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 toto issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or Order or Direction declaring (a) the action of the Respondent -1 in passing the Order of the Cancellation of Registration vide Reference No 2A36012200881 7R dated 06.01 .2022 with Form GST REG-19 is without jurisdiction, ex-facie barred by limitation, without authority of law as it is not only contrary to the provisions of the Act but also arbitrary and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice read with Artlcle 19(1Xg) and Article 21 of the Constitution of lndia. (b)tts also prayed that the Honble Court may be pleased to direct the suspend the Order of the Cancellation of Registration vide Reference No 24360122008817R dated 06.01 .2022 with Form GST REG-19 and direct the Respondents to revive the GSf Registration of the Petitioner vide GSTN lD 36AAYPK92 33B2ZE and also direct by allowing the Petitioner to file GST Returns for the balance period Post Jan 2022 to till the date. HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Suspend the Orders for the Cancellation Registration dated 06.01 .2022 of lhe Respondent-1 and direct the RespondenURespondents to Revive the GST Registration portal of the petitioner GST No 36AAYPK9233B2ZE, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. T. NARENDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: MS. SAPNA REDDY FOR SRI B. NARASIMHA SARMA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 5 : SRI K. RAJI REDDY, SENIOR S.C. FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent No.4: MS. B. KAVITHA YADAV, ASSGI

The Court made the following: ORDER l

\ THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICD UJJAL BHI'YAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.32724 of 2022 ORDER: Per the Hon'bte the ChteI Justrce uj)el Bhuyatl Heard Mr. T.Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. Sapna Reddy, Iearned counsel appearing lor respondent Nos. 1 and 2; Mr. K.Raji Reddy', learned Senior Standing Counsel for Ccnrrnercial Tax appearing lor respondents No.3 and 5; and Ms. B.Kavitha Yadav, learned counsel appearing lor respondent No.4

By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing ol the order dated 06.01 .2022 passed by respondent No. l cancelling the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regislration of the pelitioner.

From a perusal of the order dated 06.01 .2022, w'e trnd that prior to such cancellation, show cause notice / dated 02.12.2021 was issucd to the pelitioner to which I

petitioncr submittcd reply on 02.O1.2O22. Hou,evcr, respondent No.1 was of the opinion that for failure to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months, GST registration of the petitioner rvas liable to be cancelled. Accordingly, GST registration of the petitioner \\,AS cancelled rvith effect from 06.O1.2022. 4. Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that thr: issue raised in this writ petition is <;overed by 'rhe decisior-r ol this Court in Nithya Constructions v. Union of Indiat. Ilon,ever, learned counsel for the petitioner clarifies that unlike in Nithya Constructions's case (supra), petitioner has not filed an appea,l.

We havc perused the decision rendered in Nithya Constructions's case (supra) which relied upon an earlier decision ol tl-ris Court in M/s. Chenna Krishnama Charyulu Karampudi v. Additional Commissioner, Appeals2. '.2022 (71 'r'Mr 186 2022 (71 TMt 82

On due consideration and follor'ving the above decisions, we set aside the order dated 06.01 .2022 and remand the matter back to respondent No.1 to consider the grievance expressed by the petitioner against cancellation of GST registration and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The above decision shall be taken within a period of four u,eel<s from the date of reccipt of a copy o[ this order

This disposcs of the writ petition. Miscellaneous applications pending, if an1', shall stand closed. [1or.l,'ever, there shzrll be no order as to costs To, //// . K.SAILESHI DEPUTyXEGTSTRAR ./ seci6#orrrcen 1' The superintendent centrar rax, Jubiree Hiils -il, Banjara Hiil Division, Hyderabad - S00 034

The Superintendent - Central Tax, punjagutta Range, Ameerpet Division, Hyderabad - 500 073. 3. The Assistant commissioner - State Tax, Jubiree Hiils -il, punjagutta Division, . Hyderabad '

The.s^ecretary, Ministry of Finance, Union of rndia, North Brock, New Derhi _ 1 10001. 5. The Principal Secretary, (Revenue CT_ll), State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad 9. 9n" CC to SRt. T. NARENDRA KUMAR, Advocare tOpUCl 7 Two ccs to Gp for commerciat rai, uigh ctr",iioitn" siit" of rerangana at Hyderabad. IOUTI 9 9n" CC to Ms. SAPNA RE Y, Advocate IOPUCI

One CC to Sri K. Raji Reddy,.S'enror S.tIfi:-r C*ommerciat Tax [OpUCl 10. one cc to Ms. B. KAvrrHA'vAonv, Assistant ioriclioi oenei irlbFU'cr '1 1. Two CD Cooies 12.One Spare boov CHR PS ( N I /

HIGH COURT DATED:1 810812022 ORDER W.P.No.32724 of 2022 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS A c 0 s Lr[ 2022 ,J fn \8) u I

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.