R.K.Tripathi Contractors And Suppliers vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Held

The Court held that the appellate authority's order dated 19.10.2022 was unsustainable in law because it was a non-speaking order. The appellate authority failed to consider the grounds taken by the petitioner in their memo of appeal, which explained the delay in approaching the appellate forum. The Court found this practice unacceptable, as cancellation of GST registration significantly impacts a business, and routine cancellation can frustrate the purpose of the GST enactment by potentially leading to tax evasion and hindering business growth. The Court emphasized that authorities should be sensitive and consider plausible explanations for delays. Consequently, the appellate order was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the first appellate authority to decide the appeal afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee within one month.

Facts

The petitioner, R.K. Tripathi Contractors and Suppliers, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 23.12.2021 by respondent no. 3, which cancelled their GST registration. The petitioner's subsequent appeal to the appellate authority was rejected on 19.10.2022, solely on the grounds of delay in filing the appeal. The petitioner argued that the appellate authority dismissed the appeal in a formatted order without considering the grounds explaining the delay. The respondent State contended that the cancellation was due to the petitioner's failure to file returns and submit a reply to the show cause notice, and the appeal was rejected for being time-barred.

Key Issues

1. Whether the first appellate authority erred in law by rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay without considering the grounds explained by the petitioner for the delay, thereby passing a non-speaking order? (Question of law) Petitioner's arguments: The appellate authority passed a formatted order and dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay without considering the reasons provided by the petitioner for the delay. This practice is unacceptable as it affects the business of the assessee and can lead to tax evasion. Revenue's arguments: Returns were not filed by the assessee in time, a show cause notice was issued, and no reply was submitted, leading to the cancellation of GST registration. The appeal was not filed in time and was thus rejected by the appellate authority on the ground of delay.