M/S Sahil Enterprises vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax And Another

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was filed with unexplained latches, as it was instituted more than two years after the impugned order dated 05.09.2019. The Court found no credible explanation for this significant delay. Consequently, the Court declined to entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the grounds of belated filing. The Court dismissed the writ petition. However, it provided a conditional relief, allowing the petitioner to avail its remedy of appeal. The Court directed that if the petitioner files an appeal within two weeks from the date of the order, along with a copy of the High Court's order, the appeal should be dealt with and decided on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. The Court also clarified that any observations made in its order would not prejudice the petitioner's right to file an application for fresh registration.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Sahil Enterprises, challenged an order dated 05.09.2019 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Kanpur Nagar, which cancelled its registration under the U.P. GST Act, 2017. The writ petition was filed before the High Court on 20.09.2021, more than two years after the impugned order. The petitioner argued a violation of natural justice due to the absence of a prior show cause notice, citing the case of Kashi Bartan Bhandar vs. State of U.P. The respondent revenue contended that the petition suffered from unexplained latches, as GST orders are uploaded on the portal and accessible. They argued there was no genuine explanation for the delay from March 2020 to September 2021. The petitioner also stated that the cancellation order cited no grounds other than the non-reply to a notice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable due to unexplained latches, considering it was filed more than two years after the impugned order of cancellation of registration dated 05.09.2019? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that there was a complete violation of the principle of natural justice, as a prior show cause notice is a mandatory prerequisite before cancelling registration. They relied on the Division Bench judgment in Kashi Bartan Bhandar vs. State of U.P. (2019 NTN (Vol. 69) 111). Respondent's Contention: The revenue argued that the writ petition is hit by unexplained latches. They submitted that GST orders are uploaded on the portal and easily accessible, and there is no credible explanation for the delay in filing the petition from March 2020 to September 2021.