Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Tvl. Lucky Mydeen Briyani Vs Commissioner (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P (MD).No.20035 of 2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 29/08/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Tvl. Lucky Mydeen Briyani Vs Commissioner (Madras High Court)

It is seen that the petitioner during the Covid-19 pandemic period had not filed his returns and thereafter, he had not conducted any business so that he filed only nil returns. Further this case is quite similar to the cases of the petitioners in Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Vs Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) and others (W.P.Nos.25048, 25877, 12738 of 2021 etc.. batch), dated 31.01.2022. There some of the petitioner had filed an appeal beyond the period of limitation either for filing application for revocation of cancellation, while some of them had directly filed a writ petition against the order cancelling the registration. While some of them filed appeal beyond the statutory period of limitation, there was further delay in filing the writ petition. However, considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, it was held that no useful purpose will be served by keeping those petitioners out of the Goods and Services Tax regime, as such assessee would still continue to do business and supply goods/services. By not bringing them back to the Goods and Services Tax fold/regime, would not further the interest of the revenue.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

The petitioner is a proprietor of Tvl.Lucky Mydeen Briyani served with a notice for cancellation of Registration in Reference No.ZA330122009946T, dated 04.01.2022. The petitioner engaged private accountant for the purpose of filing returns and he alone had the access to the GST portal for filing returns. During the Covid-19 Pandemic, the business shut down and further, the petitioner was suffering with ill-health. Hence, the petitioner was unable to conduct the accountant and file his returns. Thereafter, the petitioner received a show cause notice, dated 02.12.2021 by the second respondent in online for the reason that why the registration shall not be cancelled under Section 29 (2) (C) of the CGST Act, since the petitioner was failed to file the returns for continuous period of six months.

GST Registration Cancellation Would Affect Interests of Revenue Madras HC

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