Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Pandarakandiyil Moideenkutty Vs Superintendent of Central Tax And Central Excise (Kerala High Court)
Appeal Number : WP(C) No. 19904 of 2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 06/07/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Pandarakandiyil Moideenkutty Vs Superintendent of Central Tax And Central Excise (Kerala High Court)

The facts of this case show that the registration of the petitioner was cancelled on 02.02.2021. The petitioner had time of 30 days from 02.02.2021 to file an application for revocation. The said period of 30 days could be extended by a period of 30 days by the Joint Commissioner, going by the provisions contained in Section 30 of the CGST Act. If one were to apply the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, to the periods of limitation prescribed by Section 30 of the CGST Act, it can be held, without any difficulty, that the petitioner had time till 28.05.2022 to file an application for revocation. The petitioner filed an appeal and possibly, by bona fide mistake, did so on 20.11.2021. This can only be seen as a availing of a wrong remedy by the petitioner. If that date was taken as the application for revocation, the period of the application for revocation can be treated as one filed within time.

Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and it is directed that if the petitioner files a fresh application for revocation within seven days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the same shall be treated as one filed on 20.11.2021 and the orders shall be passed by the 1st respondent, treating the application as one filed within time, taking into consideration the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition No.3 of 2020. However, it is made clear that all legal consequences under the provisions of the GST Acts and the Rules (following cancellation of registration and belated filing of returns) shall continue to operate against the petitioner and the restoration of registration by orders of this Court as above, will not result in the petitioner being absolved of any statutory liability as aforesaid. In other words, the statutory liabilities of the petitioner following cancellation of registration, non-filing of returns and non-payment of tax will continue to operate against the petitioner notwithstanding the directions contained in this judgment.

Whether revocation of cancellation of GST registration can be allowed even after the statutory time limit given and extended time limit by authority has been expired due to Covid-19 Pandemic all over the world?

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031