Case Law Details
Krishanu Borthakur Vs Union of India And 2 Ors (Gauhati High Court)
Gauhati High Court addressed a writ petition filed by Krishanu Borthakur, whose GST registration was canceled due to non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner, engaged in executing works contracts, failed to submit returns due to personal difficulties. A show-cause notice was issued on February 19, 2024, and, upon failing to respond adequately, his registration was canceled on March 7, 2024. Seeking relief, the petitioner initially considered an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act but was unable to file within the statutory time limit. As a result, he directly approached the High Court, citing similar past cases where GST registration was restored upon payment of dues.
The court acknowledged that in previous cases, similar orders had been issued directing tax authorities to revoke cancellations if all outstanding statutory dues were paid. The judgment noted that excluding the petitioner from the GST framework would hinder tax collection, ultimately impacting government revenue. The court, therefore, set aside the cancellation order and directed the GST authorities to inform the petitioner of his outstanding dues. Upon full payment, his GST registration would be reinstated. The case was disposed of in line with past rulings, reinforcing the principle that procedural delays should not obstruct tax compliance and economic participation.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Heard Mr. R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST, for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is engaged in execution of works contract and is an assessee registered under the provision of GST Act, 2017 and has GST Registration being Registration No. 18AQBPB7776P1Z7.
3. Pursuant to being registered under the GST Act, the petitioner has been regularly submitting his GST returns. However, due to several personal problems his GST returns could not be submitted for a continuous period of 6 (six) months. On 19.02.2024, respondent No. 3 issued a show cause notice on the petitioner to show cause as to why the GST registration should not be cancelled for not filing the returns for a continuous period of 6 months. The reply was directed to be submitted within 7 days from the date of service of notice.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by order dated 07.03.2024 under reference No. ZA180324003948F, the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled. The effective date of cancellation was 07.03.2024. The petitioner decided to approach the appellate Authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 R/W Rule 108 of CGST Rules, 2017 for invocation of cancellation of the GST Registration. But subsequently petitioner realised that since the order of cancellation of GST was passed on 07.03.2024 and the time limit for filing the appeal has already been elapsed and the appellate Authority having not been vested with the power and jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond one month after the expiry of 3 month, the petitioner having no other alternative has decided to approach this Court directly instead of preferring the appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to various orders passed by the Co-ordinate Benches too, whereby this Court had passed orders for restoration of the GST registration.
5. Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST, however, does not dispute the position that orders have been passed by the Co-ordinate Benches directing the restoration of GST Registration upon complete payment of all dues, if any.
6. The learned counsels for the parties have been heard. Pleadings on record have also been perused.
7. The petitioner is engaged in execution of works contract. Under the GST regime, the petitioner was required to pay the necessary dues under the CGST or SGST as the case may be or both. These statutory dues are required to be paid by all entities who are registered under the GST regime. Such payments of statutory due(s) contribute towards the revenue collection by the Union. If the petitioner is not included within the GST regime, then any statutory dues that may be required to be deposited by the petitioner will not be deposited and which will not be in the interest of the revenue. Therefore, in order that the petitioner is required to comply with his statutory obligations of payment of taxes under the GST regime, it would be necessary for the departmental authorities to re-consider the prayer of the petitioner for revocation of his cancellation of GST registration.
8. It is submitted at the bar that there are several orders passed by this Court as well as by other Co-ordinate Benches in similar matters whereby the matters have been disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to revoke the cancellation of registration upon due payment of all statutory dues payable by the petitioners. In some matters, the assessee had approached the statutory appellate authority for redressal of their grievances which however was rejected by the appellate authority. This Court is therefore of the view that since similar such orders have been passed by this Court as well as other Co-ordinate Benches, it will serve no purpose to keep the present writ petition pending. This present writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of similar orders as had been done by the orders passed in W.P(C) No. 6930/2023, W.P(C) No. 1049/2023, WP(C) No.5181/2023 and WP(C) No.6366/2023.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 07.03.2024 is hereby interfered with and set aside. It is directed that the Respondent No. 3, namely Superintendent of Central Goods & Services Tax, Guwahati will intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues, if any, standing in the name of the petitioner till the date of cancellation of his GST registration. Upon such intimation, if any such outstanding statutory dues under GST are required to be paid, the same shall be deposited by the petitioner without fail. Upon such payment of statutory dues under the GST by the petitioner, the respondent authority will pass appropriate orders and revoke the cancellation by restoring the GST registration of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition stand disposed of. No order as to costs
Author Bio
