Barun Chandra Deka v. The State of Assam and 3 Ors

ORDER

17.03.2023 Heard Mr. A. Todi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, Finance.

¶2The petitioner firm deals with the business of Arts and Photo framing. The petitioner firm is represented by its proprietor, namely Barun Chandra Deka. The petitioner firm has a GST Registration with effect from 23.09.2017 being Registration No. 18AIKPD3932E1ZH.

¶3Pursuant to being registered under the GST, the petitioner firm was regularly submitted the GST returns till the month of September, 2019. Thereafter, several personal problems due to COVID19 Pandemic situation and lockdown throughout the entire country, the GST returns from the month of October, 2019 to October, 2022 could not be submitted. Because of countrywide lockdown, the business suffered severe financial losses. On 12.02.2020, respondent No. 4 issued a Show cause notice on the petitioner to show cause as to why the GST should not be cancelled for not filing the returns for a continuous period of 6 months. The reply was directed to be submitted within 7 days from the date of service of notice.

¶4It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by order dated 21.02.2022 under reference No. ZA1802200145351, the GST registration Page No.# 3/5 of the petitioner was cancelled for not having submitted his reply to the Show cause notice. The effective date of cancellation was 21.02.2020. The petitioner was filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 26.11.2022 against the cancellation of the GST registration. However, the appeal filed by the petitioner came to be rejected by the appellate authority vide order dated 05.12.2022 on the ground of limitation.

¶5Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, Revenue Department submits that this Court had passed orders remanding the matter back to the appellate Authority for pre-deciding the matter on merits.

¶6The learned counsels for the parties have been heard. Pleadings on record have also been perused.

¶7The petitioner is in the business of Arts and Photo framing. Under the GST regime, the petitioner is required to pay the necessary dues under the CGST or SGST as the case may be or both. The statutory dues are required to be paid by all entities who are registered under the GST regime. Such payments of statutory dues contribute towards the revenue collection by the Union. If the petitioner is not included within the GST regime, then any statutory dues that may be required to be deposited by the petitioner will not be deposited and which will not be in the interest of the revenue. Therefore, in order that the petitioner is required to comply with his statutory obligations of payment of taxes under the GST regime, it would be necessary for the departmental authorities to re-consider the prayer of the petitioner for revocation of his cancellation of GST registration. Page No.# 4/5

¶8It is submitted at the bar that there are several orders passed by this Court as well as other Co-ordinate Benches in similar matters whereby the matters have been disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to revoke the cancellation of registration upon due payment of all statutory dues payable by the petitioners. In some matters as in the present proceedings, the assessee had approached the statutory appellate authority for redressal of their grievances which however was not redressed by the appellate authority and instead the appeals preferred were dismissed on the ground of limitation. This Court is of the view that since similar such orders have been passed by this Court as well as other Co-ordinate Benches, it will serve no purpose to keep the present writ petition pending and this present writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of similar orders as had been done by the orders passed in W.P(C) No.4063/2023, W.P(C) No. 6175/2022, W.P(C) No. 576/2023 and ors.

¶9A writ Court is empowered to condone the delay of any statutory or quasi judicial authority. Such power is inherent in a Writ Court [Commissioner of Income Tax-15 –Vs-Pheroza Framroze and Company, reported in (2017) 11 SCC 730]. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 21.02.2020 and the order of the Appellate Authority dated 05.12.2022 are hereby interfered with and set aside. It is directed that the Respondent No. 4, namely Superintendent of State Taxes, Guwahati Unit-C will intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues standing in the name of the petitioner till the date on which her GST registration was cancelled. Upon such intimation, if any such outstanding statutory dues under GST are required to be paid, the same shall be deposited by the petitioner without fail. Upon such payment of statutory dues under the GST by the petitioner, the appellate authority will re-decide the appeal on merits and Page No.# 5/5 pass appropriate order.

¶10The impugned order dated 21.02.2022 passed by the appellate authority is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the appellate authority to comply with the directions as indicated above.

¶11Accordingly, the writ petition stand disposed of. No order as to costs.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010263272022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/8230/2022o BARUNoCHANDRAoDEKAo S/O-oSRIoGANGAoRAMoDEKA,oPROPRIETORoOFoKAHINOORoARTSoANDo PHOTOoFRAMING,oHAVINGoITSoOFFICEoAToWARDoNO.o51,oH.NO.o14,o DALBARIoROAD,oSATGAON,oKAMRUPo(M),oASSAM,o781171 VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoCOMM.oANDoSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAMoFINANCEoANDo TAXATIONoDEPTT.oDISPUR,oGHY-06 2:THEoCOMMISSIONERoOFoSTATEoTAXES oASSAM oKARoBHAWAN oDISPUR oGHY-06 3:THEoJOINToCOMMISSIONERoOFoSTATEoTAXESo(APPEALS) oASSAM oKARoBHAWAN oDISPUR oGHY-06 4:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoSTATEoTAXES oGUWAHATI oUNIT-C oNEWoKARoBHAWAN oGHY-0o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oDRoANKIToTODIo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oSC,oTAXESoo Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA