Architects.Ad vs. The Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, A D Architects and M/s. Ganapathy Garments, filed writ petitions challenging orders that rejected their belated appeals against the cancellation of their GST registrations. The initial cancellation orders were dated 07.01.2019 and 05.12.2018, respectively. The petitioners filed their appeals before the appellate authority on 01.08.2021 and 29.06.2021, which were significantly beyond the prescribed limitation period. The appellate authority, by orders dated 26.08.2021 and 30.07.2021, rejected these appeals, citing that they were filed beyond the extended period of limitation, which, according to the appellate authority, ended on 06.05.2020, considering the Supreme Court's orders due to Covid-19. The petitioners argued that the Supreme Court's extension orders extended the limitation period even beyond 06.05.2020.
Held
The Court held that the reason ascertained by the appellate authority for not entertaining the appeals filed by the petitioners was unjustifiable. This was in view of the series of orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court extending the limitation period, which were not restricted to 06.05.2020. The Court found that the impugned orders could be interfered with on this ground. Consequently, the impugned orders were quashed, and the matters were remitted back to the second respondent (the appellate authority). The appellate authority was directed to entertain the appeals and decide them on merits and in accordance with law. No specific issue was left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appellate authority erred in rejecting the appeals as belated, considering the extension of limitation periods granted by the Supreme Court due to the Covid-19 pandemic? (Question of law) Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners contended that the Supreme Court's various orders extending the limitation period due to Covid-19 were not restricted to 06.05.2020. Therefore, the reason cited by the appellate authority for rejecting the appeals as time-barred was invalid. Revenue's Argument: The revenue's counsel conceded that the Supreme Court had extended the limitation period for appeals before quasi-judicial authorities and courts, initially for the first wave and subsequently for the second wave of Covid-19. Consequently, the period stated in the impugned orders (referring to the 06.05.2020 cut-off) might not be sustainable in light of subsequent Supreme Court orders.
Sections Cited
Not explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
********************* The issue raised in both the writ petitions is one and the same and therefore, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, both the writ petitions are taken up together and are decided by this common order. 2.The petitioners are registered under GST regime with Registration
Nos.33BBHPD1593E1Z1
and 33BNQPS7646G1ZE, respectively. Thereafter, show cause notices were issued on 06.12.2018 and 30.10.2018, respectively, that, since continuously six months the petitioners have not filed the returns, why action shall not be taken against the petitioners. Subsequently, the respondent department cancelled the registration vide orders dated 07.01.2019 and 05.12.2018, respectively, against which, the petitioners preferred appeals, of course belatedly on 01.08.2021 & 2/4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
W.P.[MD]No.17752 & 14239 of 2021 29.06.2021, respectively, before the second respondent being the appellate authority. The appellate authority by orders dated 26.08.2021 & 30.07.2021, has rejected the appeals stating that, beyond 06.05.2020, the appeals cannot be filed even according to the extended period of limitation by the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court due to Covid-19, as against the said appeallate authority's order these writ petitions were filed. 3.Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, who having reiterated the aforesaid seeks indulgence of this Court by adding the submission that, the time limit has been extended by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by various orders due to Covid-19, even beyond 06.05.2020. Therefore, the said reason cited by the second respondent appellate authority does not hold good. 4.Heard the leaned Standing Counsel, who, would submit that, no doubt, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has extended the limitation period for the appeals filed before any quasi-judicial authority or Courts, initially for the Covid-19 first wave and subsequently for the second wave. Therefore, the period as stated in the impugned orders may not be sustained because of the subsequent orders passed. 5.I have considered the submissions made by the learned Counsels for the parties and have perused the materials placed before this Court. 6.In view of the extension of the limitation period having been done by a series of orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, where it does not restrict only with 06.05.2020, the reason ascertained by the appellate authority in not entertaining the appeals filed by the petitioner is unjustifiable. Therefore, on that ground, this Court feels that the impugned orders can be interfered with. 7.In the result, the impugned orders are quashed and the matters are remitted back to the second respondent with a direction to entertain the appeals and decide the same on merits and in accordance with law. 8.These writ petitions are disposed of, accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected W.M.P. is closed. Assistant Registrar (Record) //// / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) MR 3/4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
W.P.[MD]No.17752 & 14239 of 2021 Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. To 1.The Commissioner of Central GST and Cental Excise, Central Revenue Buildings, No.5, V.P.Rathnasamy Nadar Road, Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002. 2.The Deputy Commissioner, The Sales Tax & Central Goods & Services Tax Department, Madurai and Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli District. 3.The State Tax Officer, Circle Officer, (ST and GST), Thuckalay, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. 4.The Assistant Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Goods and Services Tax, Karur East Circle, Karur. 5.The Deputy Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Goods and Services Tax, Erode. +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-31963[F] dated 11/10/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.J.VIJAYARAJA, Advocate (SR-31820[F] dated 08/10/2021 ) W.P.[MD]No.17752 & 14239 of 2021 08.10.2021 RK(21/12/2021) 4P 8C 4/4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.