Jones Diraviam vs. The Commercial Tax Officer

The petitioner has challenged the impugned cancellation of the GST registration of the petitioner. The issue is now squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Suguna Cutpiece Center v. the Appellate Deputy Commissioner( ST) GST) and others, Salem reported in (2022) 99 GSTR 386 (Mad).The relevant paragraph from the said decision reads as under: i. The petitioner is directed to file returns for the period prior to the cancellation of registration, together with tax dues along with interest thereon and the fee fixed for belated filing of returns within a period of forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ii. It is made clear that such payment of tax, interest, fine / fee and etc. shall not be allowed to be made or adjusted from and out of any Input Tax Credit which may be lying unutilized or unclaimed in the hands of the petitioner. iii. If any Input Tax Credit has remained unutilized, it shall not be utilised until it is scrutinized and approved by an appropriate or competent officer of the Department. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis iv. Only such approved Input Tax Credit shall be allowed to be utilized thereafter for discharging future tax liability under the Act and Rules. v. The petitioner shall also pay GST and file the returns for the period subsequent to the cancellation of the registration by declaring the correct value of supplies. vi. If any Input Tax Credit was earned, it shall be allowed to be utilised only after scrutinising and approving by the respondents or any other competent authority. vii. On payment of tax, penalty and uploading of returns, the registration shall stand revived forthwith. viii. The respondents shall take suitable steps by instructing GST Network, New Delhi to make suitable changes in the architecture of the GST Web portal to allow the petitioner to file the returns and to pay the tax / penalty / fine. ix. The above exercise shall be carried out by the respondents within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

The said decision has been repeatedly followed by this Court.

Since the issue involved in this writ petition is similar, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the guidelines provided in the order in Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece’s case. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 04.04.2024 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no TSG To The Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J. TSG

2024 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis