Mayank Agrawal vs. The Superintendent Central Goods And Service Tax
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file a manual application before respondent no. 1 for restoration of GST registration. The petitioner was directed to submit the six defaulted returns, returns from the date of cancellation until the present date, and any outstanding dues. The Court reasoned that while the petitioner raised a point regarding the Commissioner's adjudicatory role, the primary concern was the petitioner's GST registration status and the available remedies. The revenue's contention regarding the alternative remedy under Section 30 of the Central GST Act was implicitly acknowledged by directing the petitioner to file an application. The Court's operative direction was to consider the petitioner's application for restoration liberally if pending dues were paid. The issue of whether the Commissioner is an adjudicating authority under Section 107 was not definitively decided but was bypassed in favor of providing a procedural remedy.
Facts
The petitioner, seeking to quash a show cause notice and order for cancellation of GST registration (Reference No. ZA0505220139400 dated 21.02.2022), approached the High Court. The petitioner argued that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, rendering an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, to the Commissioner invalid. The revenue contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 30 of the Central GST Act for revocation of cancellation, provided they filed returns for the preceding six months, which the petitioner had failed to do as per Rule 23.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Commissioner is an adjudicating authority for the purpose of appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, and if not, whether the appeal to the Commissioner is maintainable? (Petitioner's contention: The Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, and therefore, an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, to the Commissioner is not maintainable, relying on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in SPA No. 123 of 2022 dated 20.06.2022). 2. Whether the petitioner has an alternative remedy for revocation of GST registration cancellation under Section 30 of the Central GST Act, subject to filing pending returns? (Revenue's contention: As per Section 30 of the Central GST Act, the petitioner has an alternative forum of filing an application for revocation of the cancellation of GST, with the condition that the petitioner must file appropriate returns for the six months preceding the cancellation, which the petitioner failed to upload as per Rule 23 of the relevant rules.)
Sections Cited
Section 107, Section 30, 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
WPMS No. 203 of 2023 Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
Shri Rohit Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shobhit Saharia, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking following reliefs:-
“i. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned show cause notice for cancellation of Registration bearing Reference No. ZA0505220139400 dated 21.02.2022 (Annexure – 2) issued by respondent no. 1. ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned for cancellation of Registration bearing Reference No. ZA0505220139400 dated 21.02.2022 (Annexure – 2) issued by respondent no. 1.”
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in SPA No. 123 of 2022 on 20.06.2022 wherein this Court has held that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, and, therefore, appeal under Section 107 of the
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.