Case Law Details
Valentine Events Vs Union Of India (Telangana High Court)
HC held that as the issue pertains to cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner, it would be just and proper if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Heard Mr. M.A.K.Mukheed, learned counsel representing Mr. M. Balasubramanium, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. G.Praveen Reddy, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for respondent No.1; and Mr. B. Narsimha Sarma, learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4.
2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 29.12.2020 passed by respondent No.3 cancelling Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration of the petitioner as well as the order-in-appeal dated 25.10.2022 passed by respondent No.2 as the appellate authority dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner.
3. Be it stated that petitioner was registered as a taxable person with the GST authorities under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (briefly ‘the CGST Act’ hereinafter), bearing registration No.36AMBPP4537G1 Z1.
4. A show cause notice dated 16.12.2020 was issued by respondent No.3 to the petitioner to show cause as to why GST registration of the petitioner should not be cancelled for not filing monthly returns for six consecutive months. In response thereto, petitioner filed reply on 25.12.2020. However, the reply of the petitioner was found to be not satisfactory. Accordingly, by exercising power under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, respondent No.3 passed the order dated 29.12.2020 cancelling GST registration of the petitioner.
5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, petitioner preferred appeal before respondent No.2. However, by the order-in-appeal dated 25.10.2022, respondent No.2 took the view that appeal filed by the petitioner was beyond the limitation period. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
6. Though a further appeal is provided before the Tribunal constituted under Section 109 of the CGST Act, such a Tribunal has not been constituted in the State of Telangana; as a result, petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition.
7. We find that issue raised in the present writ petition has been decided by this Court in several writ petitions including in W.P.No.27449 of 2022 decided on 30.06.2022 (Nithya Constructions v. Union of India).
8. Following the above decision and on the principle of parity, we are of the view that as the issue pertains to cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner, it would be just and proper if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner.
9. Accordingly, we set aside the order of respondent No.3 dated 29.12.2020 as well as the order-in-appeal dated 25.10.2022 passed by respondent No.2 and remand the matter back to the file of respondent No.3 to consider the matter afresh and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
10. In the course of the hearing, it would be open to the appellant to submit all the returns as per the statute.
11. This disposes of the writ petition. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed.
