Patna High Court
M/S Narayan Mandal vs The Union Of India on 23 January, 2024
Bench: Chief Justice, Rajiv Roy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1236 of 2024
======================================================
M/s Narayan Mandal (A Sole Proprietor Ship Firm), Having its Registered
Office at- Barari, P.S- Katihar Sadar, District- Katihar through its legal heir
Mr. Ajay Kumar, S/o Late Narayan Madal, aged about- 33 Years (M), resident
of Market Barari, P.S.- Katihar Sadar, Dist.- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department
of Revenue, having its office at Room No. 46, North Block, P.O. and P.S.
North Block, New Delhi- 110001.
2. The Chief Commissioner, CGST and CX, Office at C.R. Building, 1st Floor,
Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar.
3. The State of Bihar, through Commissioner, BGST, New Secretariat, Patna.
4. Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Katihar Circle, Purnea Division, Bihar.
5. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Katihar Circle, Purnea Division,
Bihar.
6. Additional Commissioner (Appeal) of State Tax, Purnea Division, Purnea.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anurag Saurav, Advocate
For the Union of India : Dr. K. N. Singh, ASG
Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX
For the State : Mr. Vikash Kumar, SC-11
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 23-01-2024
The petitioner is aggrieved with the cancellation
of registration by Annexure-P/3 order passed on
01.09.2021.
2
. Admittedly, there is an appellate remedy which
Patna High Court CWJC No.1236 of 2024 dt.23-01-2024
the petitioner availed with gross delay.
3. Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services
Tax Act, 2017 ("BGST Act" hereafter) permits an appeal to
be filed within three months and also apply for delay
condonation with satisfactory reasons within a further
period of one month. We have to take into account the
saving of limitation granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, In Re:
Cognizance For Extension of Limitation therein, due to the
pandemic situation limitation was saved between
15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022. It was also directed that an
appeal could be filed within ninety days from 01.03.2022.
Here, the order impugned in the appeal was dated
01.09.2021. An appeal was to be filed on or before
30.06.2022 as permitted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and
if necessary with a delay condonation application within
one month thereafter. The appeal is said to have been filed
only on 09.03.2023, after about eight months from the date
on which even the extended limitation period expired. In the
above circumstances, we find no reason to invoke the
extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, especially
Patna High Court CWJC No.1236 of 2024 dt.23-01-2024
since it is not a measure to be employed where there are
alternate remedies available and the assessee has not been
diligent in availing such alternate remedies within the
stipulated time. The law favours the diligent and not the
indolent.
4. The petitioner does not have any case that the
show-cause notice was not received by him. Further, it is
also pertinent that the reason stated in the show-cause
notice for cancellation of registration is that the petitioner
has not filed returns for a continuous period of six months.
The petitioner does not have a case that he had in fact filed
a return in the continuous period of six months.
5. The petitioner points out judgment dated
09.12.2022 passed in CWJC No.16203 of 2022 titled as
M/s Best Bricks v. The Union of India & Ors. annexed as
Annexure-5. Therein also the petitioner did not approach
the appellate authority within time. In the present case also,
the petitioner has approached the appellate authority but
with long delay. There is no averment in the writ petition
also that the ground stated in Annexure-P/2 that the tax
payer has not filed returns for a continuous period of six
Patna High Court CWJC No.1236 of 2024 dt.23-01-2024
months is false.
6. We find no reason to entertain the writ petition
and the same would stand dismissed.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Sunil/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 24.01.2024
Transmission Date
