Cube Corporation Gstin vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax

WPMS/20/2023HC UttarakhandGSTCNR UKHC01000110202316 February 2023Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, whose GSTIN is 05BNLPS5236D1ZY, filed a writ petition challenging the order of cancellation of their GST registration dated 09.02.2022. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash this order and a writ of mandamus to permit them to file an application for revocation of cancellation under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, directing the respondent to consider it. The State, through its learned Brief Holder, provided written instructions. These instructions stated that the petitioner was issued a notice on 22.12.2021 for cancellation of registration due to reasons including failure to furnish returns under Section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017, and details of outward supplies in FORM GSTR-1. The State further informed the Court that the petitioner had subsequently filed GSTR-3B and deposited a total of ₹2,04,512/- (including tax, interest, and penalty) for the financial year 2020-21 via DRC-03 on 17.12.2022.

Held

The Court noted the written instructions from the State, which indicated that the petitioner had subsequently rectified the defects by furnishing GSTR-3B, depositing ₹2,04,512/- towards tax, interest, and penalty for the financial year 2020-21. The State acknowledged that these actions removed the impediment for recalling the cancellation order. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to restore the petitioner's GST registration. The petitioner was also directed to file returns for the defaulted period and the period between 09.02.2022, and to pay any further dues required. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was justified, considering the subsequent actions taken by the petitioner to rectify the defaults? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Section 29(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, and the principles of natural justice). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner sought to quash the cancellation order and be allowed to file for revocation, implying the cancellation was erroneous or that subsequent rectifications should lead to its reversal. Revenue's Contention: The State initially issued a notice for cancellation based on non-furnishing of returns and outward supply details. However, upon receiving instructions, the State conceded that the defects had been removed, penalty and interest deposited, and there was no impediment to recalling the cancellation order. The State agreed that the petitioner had filed GSTR-3B and deposited the dues.

Sections Cited

Section 39, Section 30, Section 29(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS No. 20 of 2023 Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J. Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- i. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the

record of the case and quash the order of cancellation of GST Registration dated 09.02.2022 (Annexure No. 3 to W.P.). ii. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus permitting the petitioner to prefer an application U/s 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, for filing an application for revocation of the cancellation of the GSTIN 05BNLPS5236D1ZY of the petitioner and further direct the respondent no. 2 to consider the application of the petitioner in accordance with law. On the last date of listing, the learned counsel for the State was directed to take instructions, he produces written instructions today, which is quoted below:- ^^egksn;] fuosnu gS fd d`Ik;k mi;qZDr fo’k;d eq[;ky; ds i= la[;k 6259 fnukad 11-01-2023 dk lUnHkZ xzg.k djus dh d`ik djsa] ftlds }kjk mYysf[kr dfri; fcUnqvksa ij lwpuk vko”;d dk;Zokgh gsrq vkidks izsf’kr fd;s tkus ds funsZ”k fn;s x;s gSA vr% mDr i= ds vuqikyu esa lUnfHkZr C;kSgkjh loZJh Cube Corporation ds laca/k esa lknj voxr djkuk gS fd lacaf/kr

C;kSgkjh dks fnukad 22-12-2021 dks iath;u fujLrhdj.k gsrq fuEu dkj.kksa ls uksfVl fn;k x;k Fkk %& 1- Returns furnished by the dealer under Section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2- Outwards supplies details furnished by the dealer in FORM GSTR-1 egksn;] lacaf/kr O;kikjh }kjk ckn esa th-,l-Vh-vkj&3ch nkf[ky dj fn;k x;k gSA blds vfrfjDr ;g Hkh voxr djkuk gS fd buds }kjk o’kZ 2020&21 gsrq fnukad 17-12-2022 dks DRC-03 ds ek/;e ls dqy 2]04]512@& ¼dj C;kt o isukYVh lfgr½ tek fd;k x;k gSA^^

In view of such instructions, learned counsel for the State would further submit that now the defect has been removed and the penalty and interest has been deposited, there is no impediment for the respondents to recall the order of cancellation of GST Registration. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to restore the GST number of the present petitioner. For the defaulted period and the period between 09.02.2022, the return shall be filed and, if any dues are required to be paid, the same shall be paid by the petitioner. With such observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.) 16.02.2023 (Grant urgent certified copy of this order, as per Rules)

A/-

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.