M/S Up Pipe Fitting Supplier v. Goods And Services Tax And 3 Others

Case snapshot

Sections / provisions: Provisions recorded in the judgment

Questions before the Court / Tribunal

• Issue and context: This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs :- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to act in accordance with the order dated 22.10.2021 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) revoking the cancellation of the GST registration of the petitioner and restore the GST registration of the petitioner on the GST portal. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to levy any late fees/penalty for late filing of returns by the petitioner for the months of August 2021 to March Operative disposition: With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of . Order Date :- 26.4.2022/vkg
• Which factual, statutory and procedural conditions controlled the requested relief?
• How did the forum apply the governing provisions to the evidence and procedural history recorded in this case?

Material facts and procedural background

A.F.R. Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 420 of 2022 Petitioner :- M/S Up Pipe Fitting Supplier Respondent :- Goods And Services Tax And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Gaurav Mahajan,Gopal Verma Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J. 1. Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sashi Prakash Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General assisted by Sri Gopal Verma and Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs :- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to act in accordance with the order dated 22.10.2021 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) revoking the cancellation of the GST registration of the petitioner and restore the GST registration of the petitioner on the GST portal. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to levy any late fees/penalty for late filing of returns by the petitioner for the months of August 2021 to March 2022. 3. Supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 is taken on record. 4. On 12.04.2022, this Court passed the following order :- “1. Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department.

3. Notice on behalf of the respondent no.1 was accepted by learned Additional Solicitor General of General of India.

4. Notice on behalf of the newly impleaded respondent no.5 has been accepted by Sri Gopal Verma, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Government who shall communicate this order to learned Additional Solicitor General of General of India.

The only issue involved in the present writ petition is restoration of the GST registration of the petitioner on portal. Prima facie, it appears that the respondents are acting arbitrarily and in defiance of their statutory duties. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2,3, and 4 states that the server is at Chennai under the control of the respondent no.1 and despite writing letters, nothing has been done so far by the respondent no.1. The submission so made also prima facie, reflects dereliction in duties by the respondents and harassment of the petitioner by them.

(2) That the deponent at the very outset craves leave of the Hon'ble Court to bring on record certain important facts, background and material which are already part of record and also flow from the statute book and which will have a material bearing on the outcome of the writ petition. The said facts are as follows:-

Appellant / petitioner / assessee submissions

2. On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, Goods and Service Tax Council, New Delhi through its Member Secretary is allowed to be impleaded as respondent no.5.

5. On 28.03.2022 this Court passed the following order:- "Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2,3, and 4. None appears for the respondent no.1.

Revenue / respondent submissions

The judgment does not separately label the respondent’s submissions in an independently extractable passage. No contention is inferred; read the full record.

Court / Tribunal analysis and reasoning

(f) Just as the process for cancellation of Registration is through online mode, same is the process of revocation of cancellation of registration is also fully online through portal. In this process, the applicant files revocation online and the same is disposed off online accordingly. Therefore there is no option to initiate the revocation of cancelled registration by the Respondent Nos. 2,3 and 4. In terms of advisory dated 16.06.2021 on the subject "Difficulty in restoration of cancelled registration-Advisory" issued by the DG (Systems), Chennai, the request of the petitioner dated 28.10.2021 was forwarded to DG (Systems) Chennai along with duly filled prescribed format singed by the Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Agra for the needful at their end through email dated 23.11.2021. A photo copy of the email dated 23.11.2021 is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure No. CA-1).

It is, therefore, requested that this advisory may be circulated among all the concerned officers for their guidance, and issues, if any, in performance of the functionality may immediately be reported to cbicmitra.helpdesk@icegate.gov.in for necessary resolution. Copy of the communication with ticket details may also be forwarded to this office at dgschennai@icegate.gov.in for further follow up. (K.V .S. Singh) Pr. Additional Director General” 11. We hope and trust that the GST Council and authorities under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act/States Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 shall be sensitive enough to address genuine problems of the dealers including the problems being faced in giving effect to the orders of appellate authority, Tribunal and courts.

Operative decision and relief

(d) Subsequently the new partners filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) for restoration of its cancelled registration. The appeal was allowed vide order dated 22.10.2021.

We also direct that the aforesaid Registration Advisory No.07/2022, dated 23.3.2022 shall be circulated forthwith by the GST Council amongst officers under the Act, 2017 as well as amongst association of traders and industries and amongst Tax Bar Associations at the district level in the state of Uttar Pradesh. 12. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of . Order Date :- 26.4.2022/vkg

Ratio and legal principle

The narrow proposition associated with M/S Up Pipe Fitting Supplier v. Goods And Services Tax And 3 Others concerns issue and context: this writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs :- (i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to act in accordance with the order dated 22.10.2021 (annexure-5 to the writ petition) revoking the cancellation of the gst registration of the petitioner and restore the gst registration of the petitioner on the gst portal. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to levy any late fees/penalty for late filing of returns by the petitioner for the months of august 2021 to march operative disposition: with the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of . order date :- 26.4.2022/vkg The proposition cannot be separated from the judgment’s facts, the governing statutory version, the forum’s jurisdiction, and the exact relief recorded in WRIT TAX No. - 420 of 2022.

For working-paper purposes, the decision should be cited only after matching the material facts and reading the passages under the judgment-grounded record above. The editorial outcome label “Disposed” is a navigation aid; it does not replace the operative order or explain every issue in a multi-issue case.

Why this judgment matters

This decision is relevant when a file raises the same central question identified in the source headnote: Issue and context: This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs :- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to act in accordance with the order dated 22.10.2021 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) revoking the cancellation of the GST registration of the petitioner and restore the GST registration of the petitioner on the GST portal. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to levy any late fees/penalty for late filing of returns by the petitioner for the months of August 2021 to March Operative disposition: With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of . Order Date :- 26.4.2022/vkg Its practical value lies in the way the Allahabad High Court connected the governing provisions—Provisions recorded in the judgment—to the procedural posture and evidence before it.

The authority level is High Court. That affects persuasive or binding weight, but authority level alone is never enough. Territorial jurisdiction, statutory period, the identity of the challenged order, and later appellate treatment must all be checked before the case is used in advice, a submission, or litigation strategy.

Practitioner action points

• Begin with the complete judgment and mark the paragraphs supporting the exact proposition relied upon.
• Match the statutory version of Provisions recorded in the judgment and the decision date 2022-04-26; do not assume the current text is identical.
• Compare the notice, assessment, appeal or other procedural sequence with the chronology recorded in this case.
• Verify the stated later-history status and any review, appeal, SLP, curative or rectification proceedings before citation.
• Record why the client’s evidence is materially similar, and also record any fact capable of distinguishing the result.

Does this case match your facts?

Detailed reliance and distinction analysis

Identity check. Confirm that the cited cause title is M/S Up Pipe Fitting Supplier v. Goods And Services Tax And 3 Others, the proceeding is WRIT TAX No. - 420 of 2022, and the decision is dated 2022-04-26. These fields are taken from the judgment record and should appear exactly in the citation note.

Bench check. The judgment identifies the coram as Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.; Jayant Banerji,J.. A later order by another bench, a larger bench, or a higher forum may alter the weight or interpretation of the proposition.

Provision check. The source associates the dispute with Provisions recorded in the judgment. The practitioner should place the historical statutory text next to the current text and identify every amendment, proviso, explanation, rule or notification that could change the analysis.

Fact check. The source issue is not a free-standing abstract rule. It arises from the concrete record summarized above. A reliable application note should list the common facts, the different facts, and whether each difference affects jurisdiction, admissibility, limitation, burden, computation or relief.

Remedy check. The recorded result is Disposed. Where a matter is remanded, set aside, partly allowed, or disposed with directions, the exact operative language is more important than a binary winner/loser label.

History check. The current closure state is REVIEW_APPEAL_SLP_SUBSEQUENT_TREATMENT_CHECK_PENDING. If that state is pending, the page does not assert that no later case exists. It means the check remains open and must be completed at the point of professional reliance.

Section / provision impact

• Provisions in judgment — apply the exact version considered in the judgment.

Case network

• M/s SA Aromatics Pvt. Ltd. and Another v. Union of India and Others — Allahabad High Court · Disposed
• M/s Soraza Recycling Private Limited v. Union of India and Others — Allahabad High Court · Disposed
• M/S Pawan Kumar Jain And Company v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others — Allahabad High Court · Disposed
• M/S Graziano Trasmissioni v. Goods And Services Tax And 5 Others — Allahabad High Court · Disposed

Related Finin2min resources

• Case Law Hub
• Search all 692 judgments
• Explore Registration

Full judgment and source control

Read / download packaged judgment record

Source class: OFFICIAL_PRIMARY_EXACT_SANITIZED_MIRROR · Repository status: PUBLISH_READY