IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJAY BHANOT, J.
M/S Dial For Cool – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And Others – Respondents
Writ Tax No.1338 of 2022
Decided on : 30-11-2023
GST Registration - Limitation under Section 107 of the CGST Act - [Section 107, Section 169] - The court considered the interpretation of the phrase 'communicated to such person' in Section 107(1) of the Act and the mandatory prerequisites for triggering the limitation period. It referenced previous judgments to highlight the importance of proper service and satisfaction of communication to the assessee. The court also emphasized the consequences of cancellation of registration and the revenue's approach in such matters, citing relevant case law.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled, and their appeal was rejected on the grounds of being barred by limitation under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellate authority neglected to record its satisfaction of the mandatory prerequisites for triggering the limitation period and misdirected in law. It also highlighted the importance of considering the consequences of cancellation of registration and the revenue's approach in such matters.
Issues: Interpretation of the phrase 'communicated to such person' in Section 107(1) of the Act, mandatory prerequisites for triggering the limitation period, and the consequences of cancellation of registration.
Ratio Decidendi: Proper service and satisfaction of communication to the assessee are essential for triggering the limitation period under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The revenue's approach in considering the consequences of cancellation of registration is crucial.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, with a direction to decide the controversy in light of the court's observations and upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The entire exercise was to be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The writ petition (tax) was allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Shri Prathamesh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Bipin Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents-State.
2. The GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled by the authority/Assistant Commissioner, Noida Sector-10/respondent No.3 in the first instance by the order dated 04.03.2022. The petitioner carried the said order in appeal before the learned appellate authority/Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal)-Ist, State Tax, Noida.
3. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 28.09.2022 passed by the learned appellate authority/Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal)-Ist, State Tax, Noida, wherein the learned appellate authority has rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 107 of the CGST Act on the footing that the appeal was barred by limitation. The impugned order references the provisions of Section 107 of the Act and notices that the period of limitation of three months has been provided for filing the appeal. In this case the appeal was filed after a period of four months and was accordingly barred by limitation.
4. Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 pari materia with Section 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act are relevant part which provide for limitation and the same are extracted hereunder:
(1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act by an adjudicating authority may appeal to such Appellate Authority as may be prescribed within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person.
(2) The Commissioner may, on his own motion, or upon request from the Commissioner of State tax or the Commissioner of Union territory tax, call for and examine the record of any proceedings in which an adjudicating authority has passed any decision or order under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of the said decision or order and may, by order, direct any officer subordinate to him to apply to the Appellate Authority within six months from the date of communication of the said decision or order for the determination of such points arising out of the said decision or order as may be specified by the Commissioner in his order.
(3) Where, in pursuance of an order under sub-section (2), the authorised officer makes an application to the Appellate Authority, such application shall be dealt with by the Appellate Authority as if it were an appeal made against the decision or order of the adjudicating authority and such authorised officer were an appellant and the provisions of this Act relating to appeals shall apply to such application.
(4) The Appellate Authority may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of three months or six months, as the case may be, allow it to be presented within a further period of one month."
5. Section 169 of the Act provides for manner of service of notice, decision/order or summons which is relevant to the controvery is reproduced hereunder:
(1) Any decision, order, summons, notice or other communication under this Act or the rules made thereunder shall be served by any one of the following methods, namely:—
(a) by giving or tendering it directly or by a messenger including a courier to the addressee or the taxable person or to his manager or authorised representative or an advocate or a tax practitioner holding authority to appear in the proceedings on behalf of the taxable person or to a person regularly employed by him in connection with the business, or to any adult member of family residing with the taxable
Proper service and satisfaction of communication to the assessee are essential for triggering the limitation period under Section 107 of the CGST Act, and the revenue's approach in considering the co....
The application of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act in specia....
The court affirmed that while the CGST Act imposes strict limitations on appeals, such limitations do not apply in writ proceedings, allowing for the restoration of the appeal based on merits.
The judgment establishes the importance of adhering to the time limits for filing appeals under the GST Act and the requirement to provide sufficient cause for any delay in filing.
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, allowing the appeal to be heard on its merits if filed within the extended time.
Section 107 has an inbuilt mechanism and has impliedly excluded application of Limitation Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.