S A Traders vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax

Held

The Court held that the livelihood of individuals working with the petitioner's company is at stake, necessitating a liberal approach. While acknowledging that the application for revocation under Section 30 might be time-barred, the Court was inclined to waive the limitation period. The petitioner was directed to file the application for revocation within 21 days. Additionally, the petitioner must comply with other provisions of Section 30, including submitting returns for the defaulted six months and any further completed months after revocation. The revenue was directed to consider the petitioner's case liberally and dispose of the application within 15 days if no dues are found in favour of the petitioner, or upon payment of any dues. The Court's reasoning was primarily based on preventing hardship and upholding the right to livelihood, referencing the principle that denial of livelihood can be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.

Facts

The petitioner, S A Traders, a sole proprietorship dealing in scrap, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of its GST registration order dated 12/12/2022. The petitioner sought quashing of the cancellation order and a direction to permit filing an application for revocation of cancellation under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017. The revenue contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 30, subject to filing returns for the six months of default as per Rule 23. The petitioner stated readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. The Court noted that the notice sent to the petitioner indicated nil outstanding against it.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration order dated 12/12/2022 is liable to be quashed, considering the petitioner's readiness to pay dues and the potential impact on livelihood, in light of Article 21 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application for revocation of GST registration cancellation under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, and whether the limitation period for such an application can be waived? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the cancellation of GST registration severely impacts their livelihood and that they are willing to clear all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. They relied on the principle that denial of livelihood due to lack of GST registration can violate Article 21 of the Constitution, as observed in a previous Special Appeal. They sought a direction to file a revocation application. Revenue's arguments: The revenue contended that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, provided they file appropriate returns for the six months of default as per Rule 23 of the relevant rules.