Manpreet Engineering And Construction Company Through Its Partner Avtar Singh vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through The Commissioner Deptt Of State Tax

Held

The Court strongly disapproved of the petitioner's approach in impleading private respondents and seeking directions for payment of dues in writ petitions primarily challenging GST registration cancellation. The Court noted that the petitioner's counsel, on instructions, sought permission to withdraw the writ petitions. Consequently, the Court, refraining from imposing exemplary costs, dismissed all the writ petitions as withdrawn. The specific validity of the GST registration cancellation was not adjudicated upon due to the withdrawal. No specific issues regarding the GST Act provisions were formally decided on merits.

Facts

The petitioner, Manpreet Engineering and Construction Company, filed multiple writ petitions challenging the cancellation of its GST registration. The cancellation, dated October 31, 2018, was based on the ground of non-filing of GST returns for over six months. The petitioner also impleaded private respondents, Tata Steel Limited and Thermax Limited, seeking a direction for them to pay outstanding dues for different tax periods. The State respondents, including the Commissioner of State Tax and other officials, objected to the petitioner's prayer. The private respondents also strongly objected, suggesting the petitioner's actions might constitute offenses under the GST Act.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration vide reference no. ZA201018010898Q dated 31.10.2018, on the ground of non-filing of returns for more than six months, is valid. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner sought to challenge the cancellation of its GST registration. Additionally, it sought a direction against private respondents (Tata Steel Limited and Thermax Limited) to pay admitted outstanding dues for various tax periods. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondent State authorities strongly objected to the petitioner's prayer, including the prayer against private respondents. Private Respondents' Contention: The private respondents strongly objected to the petitioner's prayer, submitting that certain acts of the petitioner could amount to offenses under the GST Act.