Velu Ramakrishnan Proprietor Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Madras High Court)
In Velu Ramakrishnan, Proprietor vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the Madras High Court addressed a writ petition seeking restoration of the petitioner’s cancelled GST registration. The matter was disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of both parties — the petitioner’s counsel and the learned Additional Government Pleader representing the respondents.
Both sides confirmed that the issue was fully covered by the earlier ruling of the same Court in Tvl. Suguna Cut Piece Centre, represented by its Authorized Signatory vs The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST), Salem and another (2022) 99 GSTR 386. In that precedent, the Court had laid down detailed directions concerning the revival of GST registrations that were cancelled, emphasizing that legitimate trade should not be crippled and that businesses should be given a chance to regularize past defaults while ensuring compliance with statutory obligations.
Quoting paragraphs 227 to 229 of the Suguna Cut Piece Centre judgment, the High Court reiterated that it was appropriate to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash orders cancelling GST registrations where the objective of the GST enactment—to levy and collect just tax from every supplier of goods or services—would otherwise be frustrated. The Court emphasized that lawful trade and commerce must be allowed to continue, subject to payment of tax and fulfillment of statutory requirements.
