M/S Maya Traders Through Its Proprietor Rathod Chakabhai Mukeshbhai vs. Commissioner Of Dgst Delhi & Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Maya Traders, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a writ of certiorari to comply with an order dated 24.05.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority (Delhi GST)/Additional Commissioner. The petitioner sought to direct the Proper Officer to rectify the cancellation date of their GST registration from the date of filing their last return, i.e., 30.09.2023. The appellate authority's order, which was made operative, allowed the taxpayer's appeal, set aside the impugned order of rejection of the application for revocation of cancellation dated 05.03.2024, directed the Proper Officer to complete pending proceedings, and instructed the taxpayer to file pending returns and deposit due tax with interest. The High Court noted that the appellate authority did not explicitly direct cancellation from the date of the last return, but rather that pending proceedings would be completed.

Held

The High Court held that the appellate authority's order dated 24.05.2024 did not contain an explicit direction to cancel the petitioner's GST registration from the date of filing of their last return (30.09.2023). The Court observed that, to the contrary, the appellate authority had directed the Proper Officer to complete pending proceedings against the appellant in accordance with law. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to take appropriate steps pursuant to the directions already framed by the appellate authority in its order dated 24 May 2024. All rights and contentions of the respective parties on merits were kept open. The Court did not grant the specific relief of rectifying the cancellation date to 30.09.2023, as the appellate order did not contain such a direction.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority's order dated 24.05.2024 implicitly directed the Proper Officer to rectify the cancellation date of the petitioner's GST registration to the date of filing of their last return (30.09.2023)? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the appellate authority's order required the respondents to cancel the registration from the date of filing of the last return. They sought to enforce this interpretation through the writ petition. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, represented by the Commissioner of DGST Delhi & Ors., did not explicitly record any arguments against the petitioner's interpretation in the judgment. However, the High Court's analysis suggests that the respondents' position, as reflected in the appellate order, was that pending proceedings would be completed in accordance with law, implying no specific direction for cancellation from the last return date.