Uttarakhand High Court
S A Traders vs Commissioner State Goods And ... on 13 January, 2023
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 113 of 2023
S A Traders .......... Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax and Others
.....Respondents
Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsels for the writ petitioner.
Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel for the respondents.
-----------
Judgment dated: 13.01.2023
Hon'ble Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
Upon hearing the learned counsels, the Court made the
following Order.
1. By filing this writ application, the
petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
"a. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction, in
the nature of certiorari calling the record of the
case and quash the cancellation of GST
Registration order dated 12/12/2022
(Annexure No. 2 to W.P.) as petitioner is ready
to pay all the balance tax, interest on it and late
fee if any.
b. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction, in
the nature of mandamus permitting the
petitioner to prefer an application U/S 30 of the
CGST Act 2017, for filing an application for
revocation of the cancellation of the GSTIN
05ACZW0558LIZO of the Petitioner and further
direct the Respondent No. 2 to consider the
application of the Petitioner in accordance with
law."
2. In the light of judgment passed in
Special Appeal No. 123 of 2022 decided on
20.06.2022, the Court in the case has
observed as follows:
"8) Viewing from another angle, it is
apparent that the law made by the
Parliament as well as the Legislature with
regard to the appeals is very strict, insofar
as, that it does not provide an unlimited
jurisdiction on the First Appellate Authority
to extend the limitation beyond one month
after the expiry of the prescribed limitation.
In such case, the petitioner/appellant is put
to hardship and is left without remedy. In
such cases, the party concerned may face
starvation because of denial of livelihood for
want of GST Registration. In this case, the
petitioner/appellant is a semi-skilled labour
working as a painter doing painting on
doors, windows of the houses. Now-a-days
bills for any work executed for a private
player or, even for the Government agency,
are drawn on-line. In most cases, the
payments are made direct to the bank on 6
production of the bill with the GST
registration number. In the absence of GST
registration number, a professional cannot
raise a bill. So, if the petitioner is denied a
GST registration number, it affects his
chances of getting employment or executing
works. Such denial of registration of GST
number, therefore, affects his right to
livelihood. If he is denied his right to
livelihood because of the fact that his GST
Registration number has been cancelled,
and that he has no remedy to appeal, then
it shall be violative of Article 21 of the
Constitution as right to livelihood springs
from the right to life as enshrined in Article
21 of the Constitution of India. In this case,
if we allow the situation so prevailing to
continue, then it will amount to violation of
Article 21 of the Constitution, and right to
life of a citizen of this country"
3. The petitioner is a sole proprietorship
concern and runs a business of Scrap. The
learned counsel Mr. Shobhit Saharia
appearing for the revenue would submit that
as per Section 30 of the Central GST Act, the
petitioner has an alternative forum of filing
an application for revocation of the
cancelation of GST with the further condition
that the petitioner must file appropriate
returns for the six months which he fail to
upload in the portal of the GST Department
as per Rule 23 of the relevant rules.
4. Since, the notice has been sent to the
petitioner reading nil outstanding against it.
It is further directed that the petitioner shall
file an application for revocation under
Section 30 in terms of Section 23, though it
is time barred we are inclined to waive the
limitation and direct the petitioner to file
application for revocation within 21 hence.
He shall also comply the other provision of
Section 30 i.e submission of return for the
defaulted six months and any further
completed months after the revocation. In
such case if dues is found to be in favour of
the petitioner and he pays the same than his
case shall be considered liberal by the
revenue and shall be disposed of within 15
days. We are constrained to pass this order
because livelihood of any persons who are
working with the petitioner's company is at
stake.
5. The writ application thus stands
disposed of.
6. There shall be no order to costs.
(S.K.Mishra,J.)
13.01.2023
(Grant certified copy as per Rules)
Pooja
