GOOD LIFE ZIP INDIA v. COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICE TAX & ANR.
High Court, Delhi
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Justice & Ravinder Dudeja, Justice
GOOD LIFE ZIP INDIA
v.
COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICE TAX & ANR.
W.P.(C) 3931/2024 & & CM APPL. 16203/2024 dated 20.03.2024
Law : GST
Act Name : Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017
Relevant Section : Section 29
Decision : In favour of assessee
Non-filing of GST returns – Cancelation registration retrospectively – The petitioner contended that he regularly filed his returns; however, since June 2022, he could not file his returns due to major setbacks in the business due to the lockdown period. The business of the petitioner had completely stopped, and no income was generated. Due to the closure of his business, he did not open the GSTIN portal and receive the Show Cause Notice. It was not received by him either by email or by post. Therefore, due to a lack of access to the notice, the petitioner could not file a response to the Show Cause Notice. – Held That – The Court observed that that in terms of Section 29(2) of the Act, the proper officer may cancel the GST registration of a person from such date, including any retrospective date, as he may deem fit if the circumstances set out in the sub-section are satisfied. Registration cannot be cancelled with retrospective effect mechanically. The court held that a taxpayer’s registration can be cancelled with retrospective effect only where such consequences are intended and warranted. Both the petitioner and the respondent want the GST registration to be cancelled, though for different reasons. The court noted that the petitioner does not seek to carry on business or continue the registration. The order dated August 25, 2023, is modified to the limited extent that registration shall now be treated as cancelled with effect from November 8, 2022, i.e., the date when the Show Cause Notice was issued. The petitioner shall make the necessary compliances as required by Section 29 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Represented By:
Counsel for the Petitioner: Rajesh Mahiya, Ramanand Roy & Mithlesh Tiwari, Advocates
Continue Reading...
This is only a preview of the article. The complete article contains detailed analysis, examples, notifications, circulars, case laws, interpretations and practical guidance available to premium members.
This is only a preview of the article. The complete article contains detailed analysis, examples, notifications, circulars, case laws, interpretations and practical guidance available to premium members.
🔒 Premium Content
Subscribe to access complete articles, notifications, circulars, case laws, downloads, videos and premium resources.
Become Premium Member