In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court upheld the cancellation of Goods and Service Tax ( GST ) registration due to non-compliance with the limitation of the GST appeal and failure to utilize the Amnesty Scheme.
Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, proprietor of Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, the petitioner challenged the cancellation of his GST registration. The registration was canceled on February 9, 2023, due to non-filing of tax returns for six consecutive months.
Complete Draft Replies of GST ITC Related Notices, Click Here
The petitioner appealed on January 31, 2024, far beyond the allowed time frame, which the appellate authority subsequently rejected on March 14, 2024. The petitioner filed the appeal after the prescribed period of three months plus one month for delay condonation.
An Amnesty Scheme ( Circular No. 3 of 2023 ) was introduced, allowing canceled registrations to be restored by paying outstanding dues between March 31 and August 31, 2023, which the petitioner did not avail.
The petitioner’s counsel sought relief from the court to restore the registration despite the delay. The respondent’s counsel argued the petitioner failed to act within the stipulated time for filing an appeal and did not utilize the Amnesty Scheme offered by the government.
The bench comprising Chief Justice of Patna High Court, K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy observed both side’s arguments. The court observed that Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, sets strict deadlines for filing an appeal, which the petitioner missed.
Complete Draft Replies of GST ITC Related Notices, Click Here
The court noted the availability of the Amnesty Scheme and observed that the petitioner did not take this opportunity to restore the registration. The court emphasized that the petitioner did not exercise due diligence and that the legal system favors those who act promptly rather than those who are negligent.
Therefore, the court concluded that there was no justification for invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 since the petitioner had alternate remedies, which he failed to utilize within the stipulated time. The writ petition was dismissed upholding the cancellation of the GST registration.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
