Brijesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court)
In the case of Brijesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, the Patna High Court dismissed a petition challenging the cancellation of GST registration on the grounds of failure to pursue alternative remedies within the specified time limits. The petitioner had his GST registration cancelled on May 6, 2023, but sought to appeal the decision significantly past the allowed deadlines set forth by the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (BGST Act). The BGST Act allows for an appeal to be filed within three months of the cancellation, with a possible extension of one month for filing a delay condonation application. Despite this, the petitioner filed the appeal only on April 26, 2024, approximately eight months after the deadline had expired, thus failing to demonstrate due diligence in following the required processes.
The court highlighted that the petitioner also did not take advantage of Section 30 of the GST Act, which provides an option for revocation of cancellation within thirty days of the cancellation order. Additionally, an Amnesty Scheme was introduced through Circular No. 3 of 2023, allowing registered dealers whose registrations had been cancelled to restore their registrations by paying all dues within a specific period. The petitioner did not utilize this remedy either. The court underscored that extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution should not be invoked in situations where alternate remedies exist and have not been pursued diligently. The judgment emphasized that the law favors those who act promptly and responsibly in availing themselves of legal remedies.
