Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged the order of the Proper Officer cancelling its GST registration with effect from 21.01.2022 on the ground that the petitioner had failed to furnish GST returns continuously for six months preceding the issuance of the show cause notice. The cancellation order was passed under Section 29(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Aggrieved by the cancellation, the petitioner preferred a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority. However, the appeal was dismissed solely on the ground that it had been filed beyond the period prescribed under Section 107 of the GST Act. Since the delay exceeded the maximum condonable period of thirty days, the Appellate Authority held that it had no jurisdiction to condone the delay and rejected the appeal.

The petitioner thereafter approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking restoration of its GST registration and reconsideration of its case.

 

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the High Court can exercise writ jurisdiction where the statutory appeal has been dismissed as time-barred.
  2. Whether the absence of the GST Appellate Tribunal under Section 109 of the CGST Act deprives the taxpayer of an effective alternative remedy.
  3. Whether the matter should be remitted to the Proper Officer for fresh consideration despite dismissal of the statutory appeal on limitation.

 

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The petitioner contended that there were valid reasons for the delay in filing GST returns.
  • It was submitted that the appeal had been rejected purely on technical grounds of limitation without examining the merits of the case.
  • The petitioner argued that since the GST Appellate Tribunal had not yet been constituted under Section 109 of the CGST Act, no effective statutory remedy was available.
  • Therefore, the petitioner invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 and sought reconsideration of the cancellation order.
  • Reliance was placed upon an earlier judgment of the Telangana High Court in W.P. No.27071 of 2022, where similar relief had been granted.

 

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The respondents submitted that the appeal had admittedly been filed beyond the limitation prescribed under Section 107 of the GST Act.
  • It was argued that the Appellate Authority possesses power to condone delay only up to thirty days beyond the prescribed period.
  • Since the appeal exceeded the statutory condonable period, the Appellate Authority rightly rejected it.
  • Therefore, according to the respondents, the appellate order did not suffer from any legal infirmity and the writ petition was not maintainable.

 

Court Order / Findings

The Andhra Pradesh High Court observed that the petitioner had been left without an effective statutory remedy because the GST Appellate Tribunal contemplated under Section 109 of the CGST Act had not yet been constituted.

The Court relied upon the earlier decision of the Telangana High Court rendered in W.P. No.27071 of 2022, wherein under similar circumstances the matter had been remitted for reconsideration.

Following the same principle, the High Court held that the interest of justice required that the matter be remanded to the Proper Officer.

Accordingly, the Court:

  • Allowed the writ petition.
  • Set aside the impediment caused by the absence of the GST Tribunal.
  • Remitted the matter to the Proper Officer (1st Respondent).
  • Directed the authority to afford the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing.
  • Directed that a fresh order be passed in accordance with law within two weeks from the date of receipt of the Court's order.

 

Important Clarification

  • Mere dismissal of a statutory appeal on the ground of limitation may not deprive an assessee of relief where no effective appellate forum exists.
  • Non-constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal is a significant factor enabling the High Court to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226.
  • The High Court can remand the matter for fresh adjudication to ensure that substantive justice is not defeated by procedural limitations.
  • Personal hearing must be provided before passing a fresh order on cancellation of GST registration.
  • The judgment follows the principle earlier laid down by the Telangana High Court regarding the absence of the GST Tribunal.

Sections Involved

  • Section 29(2), Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Cancellation of GST Registration.
  • Section 107, Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Appeals to Appellate Authority and limitation for filing appeal.
  • Section 109, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Constitution of GST Appellate Tribunal.
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India – Writ Jurisdiction of the High Court.

Link to download the order -

https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1782969577_81compressed.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.