GST
TRT-2025-
Madras High Court
Date:-23-08-22
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:-
Order Date: 23 August 2022
Facts-
- The petitioner, PEARL AND CO is the proprietor and the petitioner used to purchase materials from dealers and the same were used in the execution of works contract.
- The petitioner was diagnosed as Hernia and hence, he had undergone surgery and bed rest for several months. During this period, the civil work undertaken by the petitioner was only executed to a limited extent and the staff did not upload the progress of work and hence, the returns could not be filed. During the month of July 2022, the GSTIN registration was canceled. Therefore, they were unable to avail Input Tax Credit.
- The show cause notice was issued by the state tax officer. Due to cancellation of GSTIN registration, the petitioner is unable to carry on his business. The petitioner attempted to file a representation to revoke the cancellation of registration. The same was not accepted, since the request for revocation is not filed within the statutory period of 90 (30+60) days.
- This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the order passed by the state tax officer and consequently direct the respondents to revoke the cancellation of petitioners' GSTIN Registration.
Issue-
- Whether the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner to quash the order passed by the state tax officer is sustainable?
Order-
- The Hon’ble High Court observed that the petitioner attempted to file a representation to revoke the cancellation of registration. The same was not accepted, since the request for revocation is not filed within the statutory period of 90 (30+60) days. The representation for revocation of cancellation of registration could not be done.
- The Court held that restoring the registration would not cause any harm to the department on the other hand it would be beneficial for the state to earn revenue.
- Further, in the case of TVL. Suguna Cutpiece Centre Versus The Appellant Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), The Assiatant Commissioner (Circle), Salem Bazaar - Madras High Court, wherein some of the petitioner filed an appeal beyond the period of limitation either for filing application for revocation of cancellation, while some of them had directly filed a writ petition against the order cancelling the registration. While some of them filed appeal beyond the statutory period of limitation, there was further delay in filing the writ petition – it was held that no useful purpose will be served by keeping those petitioners out of the Goods and Services Tax regime, as such assessee would still continue to do business and supply goods/services.
- Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed.
Download Case Law
