Case Law Details
Yaghneshwar Logistics Vs Additional Commissioner (Telangana High Court)
Heard Mr. Srinivas Chitturu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Narsimha Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 05.10.2021 passed by respondent No.2 cancelling the Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration of the petitioner as well as the order dated 18.08.2022 passed by respondent No.1 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner.
3. Petitioner before us is a proprietary firm and is engaged in the business of courier agency services. It is registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(briefly, ‘CGST Act’, hereinafter) as well as Telangana State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (briefly, ‘TGST Act’, hereinafter). On 02.09.2021, Respondent No. 2 issued a show cause notice as to why the GST registration of the petitioner should not be cancelled on the ground of failure to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months. Petitioner submitted reply on 03.10.2021 explaining the circumstances because of which the returns could not be filed for a continuous period of six months. However, respondent No.2 passed the impugned order dated 05.10.2021 cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner stating that the petitioner neither responded to nor filed returns up-to-date. Thereafter, petitioner preferred appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act before respondent No.1. However, respondent No.1 dismissed the appeal vide order dated 18.08.2022 on the ground of belated filing of the appeal.
4. The issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by a recent decision of this Court in M/s. Chenna Krishnama Charyulu Karampudi v. Additional Commissioner (Appeals-1) 2022(7) TMI 82. In the aforesaid decision, this Court held as follows:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
