Case Law Details
Active Pest Control Vs Deputy Commissioner (Madras High Court)
Introduction
The case of Active Pest Control Vs Deputy Commissioner in the Madras High Court provides important insights into GST registration and its cancellation, specifically when it comes to admitted tax liability. This article aims to analyze the court’s decision, the parties’ arguments, and the implications for GST registrants.
The Issue At Hand
The petitioner, Active Pest Control, saw its GST registration canceled due to a failure to remit the admitted tax liability. This led them to appeal to the Madras High Court after the expiry of the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107 and a revocation application under Section 30 of the GST Act.
Government’s Amnesty Scheme
The Government had released an amnesty scheme to allow certain GST registrants to revoke their cancellations. This scheme, extended until 31.08.2023, provides a reprieve for those who can settle their arrears and abide by certain conditions.
The Court’s View
The Court extended the benefits of the amnesty scheme to Active Pest Control, although their registration was canceled after the cutoff date specified in the scheme. The Court directed the petitioner to settle their arrears of tax along with interest before 31.08.2023. If done, the registration will be restored immediately, and the respondent will take suitable steps to effect this in the portal within a week’s time.
Implications
This decision extends the benefits of the government’s amnesty scheme to a wider array of cases, suggesting a more lenient approach to revoking GST registration cancellations when certain conditions are met. It offers a lifeline to businesses that have lost their GST registrations due to failures in fulfilling tax liabilities.
Conclusion
The case of Active Pest Control Vs Deputy Commissioner is an instructive example of how the courts are willing to offer a pragmatic solution based on government schemes to relieve businesses from the consequences of GST registration cancellations. It reiterates the flexibility of the legal system in adapting to unique circumstances while upholding the essence of the law. Businesses should take note of this development and act accordingly if they find themselves in a similar predicament.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Mr. C. Harsharaj, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice
on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner’s GST registration was canncelled in Form GST REG-19 on 04.02.2023 on account of failure on the part of the petitioner to remit the admitted tax liability.
3. The petitioner has approached this Court after limitation for filing an Appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act expired and for filing application for revocation of cancellation under Section 30 of the aforesaid Act.
4. This Court had earlier passed a detailed order in the case of Suguna Cutpiece Centre The Appellate Joint Commissioner of GST (ST) (GST) and another in W.P.No.25048 of 2021 batch etc., dated 31.01.2022 whereby registrations were directed to be restored back. The Government had itself recognised the difficulties of assessees and had given a amensty scheme vide Notification No.03/2023 – Central Tax dated 31.03.2023. By virtue of the aforesaid scheme, assessee’s registration whose registrations were cancelled before 31.12.2022 given a reprieve. The following proceedure was prescribed under the scheme:
“a. the registered person may apply for revocation of cancellation of such registration upto the 30th day of June, 2023;
b. the application for revocation shall be filed only after furnishing the returns due upto the effective date of cancellation of registration and after payment of any amount due as tax, in terms of such returns, along with any amount payable towards interest, penalty and late fee in respect of the such returns;
c. no further extension of time period for filing application for revocation of cancellation of registration shall be available in such cases.”
5. As per the explanation of the above notification, the person who has failed to apply for revocation of cancellation of registration within the time period specified in Section 30 of the said Act includes a person whose appeal against the order of cancellation of registration or the order rejecting application for revocation of cancellation of registration under Section 107 of the said Act has been rejected on the ground of failure to adhere to the time limit specified under Sub-Section (1) of Section 30 of the said Act.
6. The above Scheme has been now extended up to 31.08.2023 vide Notification No.23/2023 – Central Tax, dated 17.07.2023 Although the above scheme applies to those whose registrations were cancelled before 31.12.2022, the intention of the Government is to allow the registrants, whose registration have been revoked to revive their registration to carry on the business.
7. Considering the fact that the benefit of the scheme is available for those, whose registrations were cancelled before 31.12.2022, Court is of the view that the benefit of the scheme should ensure to persons like petitioner also whose registrations was cancelled after the cut-off date.
8. The Court is therefore inclined to dispose this writ petition by directing the petitioner to pay the arrears of tax together with interest before the cut off date on 31.08.2023 under Notification No.23/2023 – Central Tax, dated 17.07.2023. On petitioner remitting the arrears of tax and interest amount with the respondents, the registration of the petitioner shall stands restored forthwith. Respondent shall take suitable steps to effect within a weeks time of payment in the portal.
9. This writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
