T.V. Basavaraju Vs Superintendent of Central Tax and Another (Karnataka High Court)
Summary: The Karnataka High Court allowed the writ petition filed by Sri T.V. Basavaraju challenging the cancellation of his GST registration and the subsequent rejection of his appeal as time-barred. The Court adopted a justice-oriented approach, considering the petitioner’s explanation that unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause prevented him from attending the personal hearing. The petitioner had obtained GST registration on 1 July 2017. Following a show cause notice dated 28 December 2019, he submitted a reply on 7 January 2020. However, he could not attend the personal hearing, and the department cancelled his registration on 28 January 2020.
The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal on 7 December 2023, which was rejected on 12 December 2023 as barred by limitation. He approached the High Court challenging both orders. The High Court observed that rejection of the statutory appeal solely on limitation grounds did not result in the merger of the original cancellation order with the appellate order. Consequently, the rejection did not prevent the High Court from exercising its writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
Considering the petitioner’s explanation and his undertaking to file pending GST returns and pay outstanding taxes, the Court quashed both orders and directed restoration of GST registration within four weeks, subject to the petitioner filing returns and paying up-to-date taxes within the specified period. Importantly, the Court expressly clarified that its decision was based on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and could not be treated as a precedent or having precedential value for any other purpose.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
“a) Call for the records;
b) Issue a writ/s or order or direction in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ/s and quash the order dated 28.01.2020 bearing No. ZA2901200828130 passed by the respondent No.1 produced at Annexure-A;
c) Issue a writ/s or order or direction in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ/s and quash the order dated 12.12.2023 passed in GST APPEAL no. 193/23-24 A-II (ADC) on the file of Respondent no. 2 at Annexure-B;
d) Issue a writ/s or order or direction in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/s and direct the respondent to restore Petitioner’s GST No.29ACNPB9659F1Z4; and
e) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the above circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity .”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has obtained the GST registration certificate on 01.07.2017, the respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 28.12.2019, to which the petitioner submitted a reply on 07.01.2020. However, due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner was not in a position to appear before respondent No.3 for the purpose of attending personal hearing, consequently the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 28.01.2020 canceling the GST registration of the petitioner. The filed an appeal belatedly on 07.12.2023 and the same was dismissed as barred by limitation. Aggrieved by the impugned orders, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
5. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal belatedly and the same was dismissed as barred by limitation, in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to attend on all dates of hearing before respondent No.1 was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, by adopting a justice oriented approach, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the concerned respondents in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner.
6. In so far as dismissal of the appeal filed by the petitioner is concerned, since the same was summarily rejected as barred by limitation, the said order cannot constitute merger of original order of cancellation and consequently, cannot come in the way of this Court in exercising its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the impugned order of cancellation is set aside, the petitioner would file the returns and also pay up to date taxes.
8. The aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record.
9. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
i. The Writ Petition is allowed.
ii. The impugned order at Annexure-A dated 28.01.2020 and the impugned order at Annexure-B dated 12.12.2023 passed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 respectively, are hereby quashed.
iii. The respondents are directed to reinstate/restore the GST registration of the petitioner within four weeks from today, subject to the petitioner filing GST returns and paying up to date tax within the aforesaid period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
iv. It is needless to state that this order is made in the peculiar/special facts and circumstances obtaining in the instant case and this order cannot be treated as a precedent nor shall have any precedential value for any other purpose, whatsoever.
