Telangana High Court
M/S. Advitha Creative Studios vs The Additional Commissioner on 12 August, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.21616 OF 2024
ORDER:
(per Hon'ble Justice Sujoy Paul) Sri Kohir Bhaskar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC for the respondents.
2. With the consent finally heard.
3. This petition mounts challenge on the appellate order dated 17.10.2023 (Annexupre P.1), whereby, order of cancellation dated 05.01.2023 was upheld.
4. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties agreed that this petition may be disposed of in terms of order of Madras High Court in the case of Tvl. Sastha Engineering Works, Rep by its Partner vs. State Tax Officer (Circle) and Another1 wherein it was held as under:
"4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that in identical circumstances, this Court, in the case of Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Vs The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) and others (W.P.Nos. 25048, 25877, 12738 of 2021 etc., batch), dated 31.01.2022, issued the following directions:
"229. In the light of the above discussion, these Writ Petitions are allowed subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioners are directed to file their returns for the period prior to the cancellation of registration, if such returns have not been already filed, together with tax defaulted which has not been paid prior to cancellation along with interest for such belated payment of tax and fine and fee fixed for belated filing of returns for the 1 2022 SCC Online Mad 8452 2 defaulted period under the provisions of the Act, within a period of forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if it has not been already paid.
ii. It is made clear that such payment of Tax, Interest, fine / fee and etc. shall not be allowed to be made or adjusted from and out of any Input Tax Credit which may be lying unutilized or unclaimed in the hands of these petitioners.
iii. If any Input Tax Credit has remained utilized, it shall not be utilised until it is scrutinized and approved by an appropriate or a competent officer of the Department.
iv. Only such approved Input Tax Credit shall be allowed for being utilized thereafter for discharging future tax liability under the Act and Rule.
v. The petitioners shall also pay GST and file the returns for the period subsequent to the cancellation of the registration by declaring the correct value of supplies and payment of GST shall also be in cash.
vi. If any Input Tax Credit was earned, it shall be allowed to be utilised only after scrutinising and approving by the respondents or any other competent authority.
vii. The respondents may also impose such restrictions / limitation on petitioners as may be warranted to ensure that there is no undue passing of Input Tax Credit pending such exercise and to ensure that there is no violation or an attempt to do bill trading by taking advantage of this order. viii. On payment of tax, penalty and uploading of returns, the registration shall stand revived forthwith.
viii. On payment of tax, penalty and uploading of returns, the registration shall stand revived forthwith.
ix. The respondents shall take suitable steps by instructing GST Network, New Delhi to make suitable changes in the architecture of the GST Web portal to allow these petitioners to file their returns and to pay the tax/penalty/fine.
x. The above exercise shall be carried out by the respondents within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
xi. No cost.
xii. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed."
5. It is agreed that in the light of Madras High Court Judgment, aforesaid impugned appeal order may be set aside and matter may be restored to the file of appellate authority. 3
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that petitioner will take all such steps, which are directed to be taken by Madras High Court in para No.4 of the aforesaid order. In that event, his registration be restored by the appellate authority.
7. Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, opposed the prayer, but fairly submitted that matter is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment of Madras High Court.
8. Accordingly, the appeal order dated 17.10.2023 is set aside. Consequently, order dated 05.01.2023 is also set aside. The appeal is restored in the file of original authority/respondent No.2. If petitioner fulfils the aforesaid requirement, the appellate authority shall pass necessary order for restoration of registration and grant all other benefits.
9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
________________________ JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL ____________________________________________ JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO 12.08.2024 nvl