GST - Madhya Pradesh High Court: As communication of the SCN regarding cancellation of registration was sent on the mobile bearing number as mentioned on the portal and e-mail address of erstwhile consultant, hence there is no fault of Revenue – Appeal preferred by petitioner u/s. 107 is time barred - Writ Petition dismissed [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
26-Nov-2022 23:24:34
Order date – 23 November 2022
Facts –
- The Petitioner, M/S Yash Krishi Seva Kendra, filed this petition praying to direct the respondents to revoke the cancelled GST.
- The petitioner contended that he was neither issued with show cause notice on 16.05.2018 u/s. 29(2) of the M.P. GST Act nor the order of cancellation dated 04.03.2022 was communicated to the petitioner.
- Being aggrieved the appellant had filed this appeal.
Issue –
- Whether non-communication of order of cancellation of registration within the period of limitation is in order?
Order –
- The Hon’ble High Court states that the crux of the grievance is non-communication of the order of cancellation of registration within the period of limitation prescribed for preferring an appeal whereby depriving the petitioner of availing the remedy of appeal.
- A bare perusal of the order dated 25.02.2020 reveals that the Revenue in the said case had communicated the order of cancellation of registration to the erstwhile counsel of the petitioner therein and thus the Co-ordinate Bench held that the period of limitation would be counted from the time the petitioner therein gained knowledge of the impugned order and not from the date of communication to erstwhile counsel.
- The High Court also states that it is clear from the return that the respondents adhered to the provision of Section 169 of the GST Act as regards communication of the show cause notice as well as order of cancellation of registration and, therefore, no fault can be found with the Revenue.
- Pertinently, the return of respondents further reveals that the show cause notice in question was sent on the mobile bearing number as mentioned on the portal belonging to petitioner and e-mail address of erstwhile consultant.
- Therefore, it is clear as day light that the appeal preferred by petitioner u/S. 107 of GST Act was hopelessly time barred and since there is no further enabling provision in the hands of appellate authority to extend the period of limitation, hence it is held that in its writ jurisdiction cannot tinker with the statutory provision u/S. 107 of GST Act, which does not bestow any discretionary power on the appellate authority to extend the period of limitation.
- Writ Petition dismissed.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation