Harvinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Retired Partner Liable for Firm’s GST Dues in Absence of Intimation to Commissioner under Section 90 of CGST Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The case of Harvinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors., decided by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on July 18, 2025, addresses the critical issue of a retired partner’s liability under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act in the absence of timely intimation to the authorities. The judgment clarifies the statutory obligations of partners upon retirement and the consequences of failing to meet these requirements. The court’s decision, which was in favor of the revenue, underscores the principle that a partner’s liability continues until the Commissioner receives proper notice of their retirement.
Case Background
The petitioner, Harvinder Singh, was a partner in the firm M/s Foreigners Auto Zone. He claimed to have retired from the partnership on April 20, 2021. Subsequently, the State Tax Officer initiated proceedings against the firm for an outstanding GST liability of Rs. 37,84,228 for the assessment year 2023-24. This liability was assessed due to a discrepancy in the payment of GST.
Recovery actions were initiated, which included the attachment of the petitioner’s share in a piece of land. The petitioner challenged these actions, arguing that he had retired from the firm before the default occurred and therefore could not be held responsible. He contended that the intimation of his retirement was the responsibility of the firm and that a belated communication was sent by a continuing partner on February 28, 2025, to update the partner details. The petitioner also highlighted that his login access to the GST portal was with the existing partners, making it impossible for him to provide the necessary intimation himself.
