The serious illness of a Managing Director can justify delays in responding to regulatory notices, warranting restoration of GST registration.

JUDGMENT

Alok Mathur, J.

Heard Shri. Sheo Shankar Verma, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material available on record.

2. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the appellate order dated 21.09.2023 passed by the Additional Commissioner Grade-2 (Appeal) Judicial, Section-3, State Tax, Lucknow wherein an appeal was filed against the order dated 28.01.2023 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Lucknow cancelling the registration of the petitioner was challenged.

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is running the business of Consultancy Services from 24.04.2021 and had applied for G.S.T. Registration, which was granted to him bearing Registration No. 09AAFCE9600EIZR. It has further been submitted that the Managing Director of the petitioner firm namely Shivam Kumar had fallen seriously ill due to which neither was the business conducted nor were the relevant papers filed before the concerned authority. He submits that a show cause notice was issued on 27.12.2022 seeking response of the petitioner as to why registration be not cancelled. The reason for cancellation was shown as non-commencement of the business of the tax payer within six months from the date of its registration. It is stated that due to the ill health, the petitioner could not respond to the said notice and subsequently, the GST Registration was cancelled by the order of the Assistant Commissioner, Lucknow only on the ground that no response has been given by the petitioner to the show cause notice.

4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 27.12.2022 the petitioner had preferred an appeal and the same was rejected on the ground of delay and the same was filed after the expiry of the period of limitation provided for Section 107 of the U.P. GST Act.

5. It is submitted that the GST Appellate Tribunal has not been created in the State of U.P. and consequently, the petitioner having no other alternative remedy has preferred the writ petition.

6. Perusal of impugned appellate order indicates that the petitioner was unable to demonstrate the valid reasons for delay of 95 days while filing the said appeal. Before this Court various medical documents have been annexed to demonstrate that the Managing Director, namely, Shivam Kumar was suffering from Tuberculosis during the said period. It has further been stated that the petitioner had deposited all pending amount of the GST along with late fee and interest and the receipt dated 31.05.2023 has also been annexed to demonstrate the same.

7. The cancellation of the registration has a very serious consequences and accordingly, considering the fact that the petitioner has been able to demonstrate that he was seriously ill during the period and on the said account could not submit the reply to the show cause notice, on account of which, his registration was cancelled. Further, it has been indicated that the petitioner has already deposited the tax along with late fee and interest and accordingly, considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner, the respondents are directed to restore the GST Licence of the petitioner within a period of ten days from the date of communication of the order. It is further provided that any other amount is due from the petitioner, the same should be communicated to him and the petitioner is directed to pay the same within a period of seven days from the date of said communication.

8. In light of the above, the petition is disposed of.