M/S Limra Developers v. Additional Commissioner And Another

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 229 of 2022

Petitioner :- M/S Limra Developers Respondent :- Additional Commissioner And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Sunder,Shubham Agrawal,Sudhir Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

1. Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Rishi Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for

2. Through this writ petition, the order passed by respondent

No.2 cancelling registration of the Goods and Service Tax of

the petitioner as well as order passed by first Appellate

Authority dated 04.09.2021 have been assailed.

3. The Assessee, who was earlier registered under the

U.P.Goods and Service Tax Act, was served with a show cause

notice on 20.09.2019. A reply was required to be filed by the

petitioner within 7 days, which he failed to do so. The show

cause notice mentioned that in case of non filing of reply, the

order of cancellation of registration would be passed.

4. On 01.10.2019, the Taxing Authority cancelled the

registration of the petitioner. Against the order of cancellation,

the appeal was preferred at a delayed stage before the first

Appellate Authority on 14.4.2021. The first Appellate Authority

has rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation hence the

5. Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submitted that there is a provision for filing of

revocation application under Section 30 of Central Goods and

Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter called as "Act of 2017". He

further contended that the Assessee had an option of either of

filing revocation application or statutory appeal under Section

107 of the Act of 2017. According to him, the Government had

issued a notification on 25.06.2020 extending the period for

filing of revocation application till 30th September, 2020. He

then contended that the Assessee, instead of filing a revocation

application, had preferred an appeal and the notification

extending the period of filing of revocation application should

be read as an extension of time for filing appeal also. He has

relied upon decision of coordinate Bench of this Court in M/s

Singh Group vs. State of U.P. & 2 others 2022 U.P.T.C.

6. According to learned counsel, as the period stood extended

till 30th September, 2020 and limitation was extended in suo

motu proceedings by Hon'ble Apex Court in Suo Motu Writ

Petition (c) No.3 of 2020 (In re: Cognizance for Extension of

Limitation) till 28th February, 2021, thus the appeal filed by

the Assessee was not time barred.

7. On the contrary, Sri Rishi Kumar, learned Standing Counsel

submitted that the notification issued by Central Government on

25th June, 2020 is prospective in nature and the benefit, as

claimed by the Assessee, cannot be granted to him as his

registration was cancelled vide order dated 01.10.2019.

8. According to learned Standing Counsel, the provision of

revocation cannot be equated with the provisions of appeal, as

provided under Section 107 of the Act of 2017. He then

contended that an appeal is filed against the order passed by the

Assessing Authority and thus the period extending filing of

revocation application cannot be read into the provisions of

appeal. According to learned Standing Counsel, the judgment

rendered in the matter of M/s Singh Group (supra) is not

applicable in the present matter.

9. On merits also, learned Standing Counsel submitted that

cancellation order is dated 01.10.2019 and if limitation is

counted as per provisions of the Act of 2017 as well as the

notification, the appeal filed by the Assessee is beyond time.

10. I have heard the respective submissions advanced by

counsels and perused the material on record.

11. Without entering into the merits of the case, this Court finds

that as the GST regime was introduced PAN India in the year

2017, there was some teething problem in its implementation.

The Government was inviting suggestion and making

improvement in the functioning of the provisions of the said

12. Looking to the fact that the appeal has been filed by the

Assessee-petitioner at a delayed stage and in between the

COVID-19 pandemic had intervened, taking sympathetic view,

this Court finds that the Assessee cannot be left remediless and

the Appellate Authority should have entertained the appeal and

decided the same on merits. The business cannot be hampered

and suffered on mere technicalities of law and the Appellate

Authority should have considered the appeal on merits.

13. Without making any comment on the judgment rendered by

coordinate Bench or relying upon the said judgment, I find that

the order passed by first Appellate Authority dated 04.09.2021

is unsustainable in the eyes of law and the same is hereby set

aside. The matter is remitted back to the first Appellate

Authority to reconsider the appeal of the Assessee-petitioner on

merits and decide the same strictly in accordance with law

without going into the question of limitation, preferably within

a period of one month from the date of production of certified

copy of this order before him.

14. Writ petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 9.1.2023 Kushal

2023-01-09T18:11:36+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad