Dinesh Lal vs. Assistant Commissioner State Tax Rudraprayag
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017. This application must be filed within two weeks from the date of the order. The petitioner is required to comply with all conditions stipulated in Section 30 of the CGST Act, including submitting all pending returns and depositing any outstanding dues. The Competent Authority is directed to consider the petitioner's revocation application within two weeks of its filing, provided it is submitted within the stipulated period. The reasoning implicitly acknowledges that while non-filing of returns is a valid ground for cancellation, the circumstances leading to it warrant consideration for revocation.
Facts
The petitioner, a civil contractor, had their GST registration cancelled by an order dated September 11, 2023. The stated ground for cancellation was the failure to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the non-filing of returns was due to the death of the petitioner's brother. The petitioner's counsel also brought to the court's attention a similar controversy decided by a coordinate bench of the High Court in Writ Petition M/S No. 3187 of 2022, requesting the present petition be decided similarly. The counsel for the respondents did not dispute this submission.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration on the ground of non-filing of returns for six months, without considering the reasons for such non-filing, is legally sustainable? (Question of law, turning on Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 21 of the CGST Rules, 2017). Petitioner's Arguments: - The petitioner argued that the cancellation of GST registration was solely based on the failure to file returns for six months. - They contended that the non-filing was due to a personal difficulty, namely the death of the petitioner's brother. - Reliance was placed on a coordinate bench's decision in Writ Petition M/S No. 3187 of 2022, suggesting a similar outcome for the present case. Revenue's Arguments: - The learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 30, Rule 21, Rule 23
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
2024
WPMS No. 3589 of 2023 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Dabral, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. 2. Petitioner is a civil contractor. His GST registration under the provisions of Central GST Act, 2017 has been cancelled vide order dated 11.09.2023 on the ground that the petitioner failed to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months.
Though this fact has not been pleaded in the writ petition, but Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the GST registration was cancelled only on this ground.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that six months returns could not be filed because the brother of the petitioner died which led to default on the part of petitioner in submission of GST returns.
It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that coordinate Bench of this Court has
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 Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.