Rwirup Muchahary vs. The Stateof Assam And 3 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Rwirup Muchahary, proprietor of a business, challenged the cancellation of his GST registration by an order dated 04.06.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Kokrajhar. The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal against this cancellation order, but it was rejected on 13.12.2022 by the Joint Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeals) on the grounds of being time-barred. The petitioner contended that the cancellation was due to non-filing of returns and expressed willingness to file the pending returns, arguing that this would prevent prejudice to him and serve no fruitful purpose for the Department. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, submitted that the rejection of the appeal on limitation was in accordance with the law.
Held
The Court held that given the facts and circumstances, the sole reason for the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was the non-submission of returns for a particular period. The petitioner expressed a willingness to rectify this default by filing the pending returns within a stipulated timeframe. The Court found that directing the petitioner to file the remaining returns within one month from the date of the order would be a pragmatic solution. Consequently, the Court directed that if the petitioner files the outstanding returns within one month, the order of cancellation of GST registration shall be revoked by the authorities, and the registration shall be reinstated. This direction was made subject to the condition that the returns are filed within the specified period and are accompanied by all statutory dues and/or penalties. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's appeal against the cancellation of GST registration on the ground of limitation was legally sustainable, considering the petitioner's willingness to rectify the default (non-filing of returns)? The petitioner argued that the cancellation of GST registration was solely due to non-filing of returns, a default he was ready to rectify by filing the pending returns. He contended that insisting on the time-bar for the appeal would cause grave prejudice and hardship, serving no practical purpose for the Department. The petitioner relied on the principle that technicalities should not defeat substantial justice, especially when the underlying issue can be resolved. The respondent (State) argued that the rejection of the appeal on the ground of limitation was in accordance with the prescribed legal provisions. They contended that the appellate authority correctly applied the law regarding the time limit for filing appeals, and the petitioner's willingness to file returns did not override this procedural mandate.
Sections Cited
Section 29
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 17-03-2023
Heard Dr. A.K. Todi, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has put to challenge an order dated 04.06.2022 whereby the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled. Against the said order, an appeal has also been preferred which however has been rejected vide order dated 13.12.2022 on the ground that the same is time barred. It is the case of the petitioner that since the reason of cancellation was non- filing of the returns and the petitioner is ready and willing to file the returns for the period involved, no fruitful purpose would be served either to the Department and on the other hand, grave prejudice and hardships would be caused to the petitioner. Shri B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Taxes however submits on instructions that the rejection of the appeal on the ground of limitation is as per prescription of law. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the only reason of cancellation of GST registration being non submission of the returns for a particular period which is been sought to be rectified by filing the same by the petitioner within a time bound frame, it is directed that if the petitioner files the remaining returns within a period of a month from today, the order of cancellation shall be revoked by the authorities and the GST registration shall come into effect. The aforesaid direction is however subject to the condition mentioned above of prior filing of the returns within a stipulated period of one month. It is needless to state that the returns are to be accompanied by all statutory
Page No.# 3/3 dues and /or penalty. Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.