M/S. Alm Engineering And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. ALM Engineering & Co., a construction company, filed a writ petition seeking to quash the cancellation of its GST registration by the respondent, the Assistant Commissioner (ST). The cancellation, dated 12.01.2023, was based on the petitioner's failure to file GST returns for the past six months. The petitioner contended that its accountant, instructed to file NIL returns, failed to do so due to ill health. The petitioner only became aware of the cancellation when other taxpayers informed them. The petitioner argued that the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 should be excluded for limitation purposes, citing a Supreme Court order. They also referred to a Madras High Court judgment in Tvl. Suguna Cut piece Vs Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) which condoned delays in similar cases. The petitioner noted that while Notification No.03/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 extended time for taxpayers whose cancellation was on or before 31.12.2022, their cancellation on 12.01.2023 fell outside this scope. The petitioner expressed willingness to file returns and pay dues upon restoration of their registration.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of relief, despite their cancellation date falling outside the specific period mentioned in Notification No.03/2023-Central Tax. The Court reasoned that the petitioner's case was pending consideration during the period of extension, making them eligible for the benefit. Furthermore, the Court found that the issue was covered by the judgment in Tvl. Suguna Cut Piece’s case. The Court noted that the impugned order dated 19.12.2022 (though the cancellation date is stated as 12.01.2023 in facts) did not cite any reasons. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondent to restore the petitioner's GST registration. Upon restoration, the petitioner is mandated to file returns and pay tax and penalty as per law. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration by the respondent is illegal and arbitrary, warranting quashing and restoration of the registration, in light of the petitioner's explanation for non-filing of returns and the applicability of condonation of delay principles? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the cancellation was arbitrary as it was based on a web portal show cause notice which they could not access proficiently. They contended that the impugned order lacked specific reasons. They relied on the Supreme Court's exclusion of the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for limitation calculations and the Madras High Court's decision in Tvl. Suguna Cut piece Vs Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) to condone delays in GST registration revocation. They also highlighted that Notification No.03/2023-Central Tax, while beneficial, did not cover their cancellation date of 12.01.2023, but argued they should still be entitled to relief. Respondent's arguments: The respondent did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER This Writ Petition is filed for Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the cancellation order dated 12.01.2023 passed in Reference No. ZA330123054003E by the respondent and to direct the respondent to revoke the cancellation of GSTN Registration No.33ABNFA2958F1ZF within such time as may be directed by this Court.
The petitioner is a Construction Company voluntarily registered under GST with Registration No.No.33ABNFA2958F1ZF. The petitioner has filed returns through an accountant, but due to ill health he could not follow the filing of returns for the past six months. The contention of the petitioner is that the said accountant was instructed to file NIL returns but he failed to file the returns for the past six months. The other end tax payers had informed the petitioner that his registration is cancelled, then only it came to the knowledge that the respondent issued show cause notice dated 09.12.2022 in the web portal and had cancelled the GST registration stating that the petitioner had not filed GST returns for the past six months. The further contention of the petitioner is that the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 is excluded for the 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis purpose of calculating limitation in the Suo Motu petition by Hon’ble Supreme has issued Notification No.03/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and has extended the time up to 30.06.2023, but the extension is granted to taxpayers granting time on or before 31.12.2022. But the petitioner’s cancellation is on 12.01.2023, hence the benefits of the said notification could not be availed by the petitioner. The petitioner has already filed GST monthly returns upto January 2023 and had paid necessary late fee and for the remaining period from February 2023 the petitioner could not upload the returns since the registration is cancelled. If the cancellation is set aside and the GST registration is revoked, then the petitioner is willing to pay the GST along with late fee.
The further contention of the petitioner is that the show cause notice, dated 09.12.2022, was issued to the petitioner in web portal, but the petitioner is not proficient in computer access. After issuing the show cause notice, the respondent has cancelled the registration. Thereafter the respondent has cancelled the GST registration with effect from 31.12.2022. The contention of 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis the petitioner is that the impugned order is bereft of any details. In the meanwhile, the respondent has issued amnesty scheme but the petitioner could not avail the benefit because of the cancellation of the registration of GST.
After hearing the rival submission this Court has given its anxious consideration. On perusal of the impugned order, dated 19.12.2022, it is seen that the respondent have not cited any reason. It is seen from the records that the Government has issued Notification No.03/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and has extended the time up to 30.06.2023, but the extension is granted to taxpayers granting time on or before 31.12.2022. Unfortunately, the petitioner’s cancellation was on 12.01.2023, had it been prior to 31.12.2022 then the petitioner would have come within the time prescribed under the said notification. But the consideration for extension was pending during that period, hence this Court is of the considered that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit. Moreover, the issue is covered under the judgment of Tvl. Suguna Cut Piece’s case stated supra.
Therefore, this Court is allowing the writ petition and the respondent is directed to restore the petitioner’s GST registration number. After restoration, the petitioner is directed to file the returns and pay tax and penalty as per law. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
With the above said direction, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. 26.07.2023
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Nsr To The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tuticorin II Assessment Circle, Commercial Tax Buildings, Tuticorin. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis S.SRIMATHY, J.
Nsr
2023
6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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.