Case Law Details
Jones Diraviam Vs Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal) (Madras High Court)
In the case of Jones Diraviam vs. Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal) in the Madras High Court, the petitioner, a supply contractor with GST registration, had his registration cancelled due to failure to submit returns. The cancellation of registration severely impacted his ability to conduct business and maintain his livelihood. Although the petitioner filed an appeal, it was delayed by 260 days.
The petitioner argued that he was unaware of the notice for non-filing of returns and failed to respond due to inadvertent oversight. However, the respondents maintained that despite notice, the petitioner neither replied nor filed the appeal in time.
The court examined similar cases, including one in the Bombay High Court and another in the High Court of Uttarakhand, where the courts emphasized the importance of protecting the rights of individuals, particularly small-scale entrepreneurs, under the GST regime. These judgments underscored that denying the right to carry on trade and commerce violates constitutional guarantees under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The courts recognized the adverse impact of stringent provisions on individuals, especially during unprecedented circumstances like the pandemic. In one instance, the petitioner faced medical emergencies, including heart disease, further complicating his situation. Despite facing such challenges, the petitioner’s appeal was dismissed due to a technical lapse.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
Even after 75 years of indepandance and five years of GST, stillwe accept the excuse of “illeterate dealer” However the honble judge gave good relief.