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
2022 SCC Online Mad 8452
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.
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
