On December 13, 2022, the Himachal Pradesh High Court in a Division bench consisting of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Virender Singh while disposing of a writ petition related to GST registration stated that “We really wonder why and how respondent No.2 could have taken such a hyper-technical and pedantic view of the matter to hold that even the delay of one day would be fatal to the maintainability of the appeal”.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner was a dealer registered under the GST. On 14.07.2020, he was served with a show cause notice for cancellation of the GST registration. Thereafter, the GST registration was suo motu cancelled by respondent no. 4 via order dated 28.07.2020 on the ground that the petitioner had not filled up up-to-date returns along with the payment of tax. The application for revocation of the GST registration was also rejected by Respondent no. 3. Moreover, an appeal filed by the petitioner against the same was dismissed by Respondent no. 2 just because it was barred by one day.
Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking the substantive reliefs of issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 29.08.2022 issued by respondent No.2 on the ground of one day’s delay as the impugned order had been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice by not deciding the appeal on merit, or/and “issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus/certiorari directing the respondents to stay the operation of the order dated 28.07.2020 passed during the pendency of writ petition and direct the respondent No. 3 & 4 to revoke the cancellation of CGST Registration in the interest of law and justice”.
Observations of the Court:
The Hon’ble court observed that respondent no. 2 was not vested with the authority to condone the delay. Some cases like M/s G.G. Agencies Girijeshwar Rice Mill vs. The State of Karnataka & Ors., Vinod Kumar Vs. Commissioner Uttarakhand State GST & Ors. (Uttarakhand High Court), Poonamchand Saran vs. Union of India, and M/s Trans India Carco Carriers Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (Madras High Court) were referred by the court.
The court further observed that the petitioner would not be able to continue with his business in absence of GST registration and thus he would be deprived of his livelihood which amounts to a violation of his right to life and liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The court stated that “We really wonder why and how respondent No.2 could have taken such a hyper-technical and pedantic view of the matter to hold that even the delay of one day would be fatal to the maintainability of the appeal.”
The Decision of the Court:
The writ petition was disposed of. Respondent no. 2 was directed to decide the appeal on its merit and the order dated 29.08.2022 was set aside.
Case Title: Sunil Kumar Vij Vs. Union of India and others
Coram: Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Virender Singh
Case No.- CWP No.8478 of 2022
Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. Goverdhan Lal Sharma and Ms. Rashmi Bhardwaj
Advocate for Respondents: Mr. Balram Sharma for UOI and Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora for others.
Read Judgement
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
0 Comments