Disposed

M/s.Arputham Transport v. The State Tax Officer

Madras HC21 Mar 2025WP(MD)/7796/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns for six months under Section 29(2) CGST Act; petitioner sought revocation. Court followed Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Center and disposed of the writ petition on those terms, directing revival of registration upon payment of taxes, fees and filing of returns.

What did the court decide?

Revocation/revival of GST registration upon filing returns and paying tax, interest and late fee per Suguna Cutpiece Center conditions.

M/s.Arputham Transport Vs The State Tax Officer — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.7796 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 21.03.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.7796 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.5904 of 2025

¶7

M/s.Arputham Transport, Rep. by its Proprietor Mrs.Dalin Jancy, No.19G, Gurusadi, Punniyavalanpuram, Kavalkinaru, Tirunelveli District-627105.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

-vs-

¶10

The State Tax Officer, Nanguneri Assessment Circle, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in Reference Number. ZA330422050457T dated 13.04.2022 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to revoke the cancellation of the Registration under the GST Act bearing GSTIN/UIN. 33COPPD4834L1ZO.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.J.K.Jayaselan Government Advocate

¶15

_____________ Page 1 of 6_

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.7796 of 2025

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.K.Jayaselan, learned Government Advocate for the respondent.

¶20

2 . The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the order of cancellation of

¶21

the registration of the petitioner on the premise that the statutory returns has not been filed for a continuous period of six months, thereby invoking Section 29(2) of CGST Act.

¶22

3 . It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the returns have been filed and the appropriate taxes have also been paid and the petitioner is ready to pay any further taxes that may be due, along with late fee and interest, as required under GST Act.

¶23

4 . At the outset, it is submitted by both the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents that the issue stands covered by a series of judgments, commencing with the decision in Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Center Vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST)

¶24

_____________ Page 2 of 6_

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

W.P.(MD)No.7796 of 2025

¶27

(GST) and others [(2022) 99 GSIR 386] , wherein, under identical circumstances, this Court has directed the revocation of cancellation of registration subject to conditions.

¶28

5 . This Court has been consistently following the directions issued in

¶29

Tvl.Suguna Cutpiece Center's case [cited supra]. The relevant portion of the order is extracted hereunder:-

¶30

''229. In the light of the above discussion, these Writ Petitions are allowed subject to the following conditions:

¶31

i. The petitioners are directed to file their returns for the period prior to the cancellation of registration, if such returns have not been already filed, together with tax defaulted which has not been paid prior to cancellation along with interest for such belated payment of tax and fine and fee fixed for belated filing of returns for the defaulted period under the provisions of the Act, within a period of forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if it has not been already paid.

¶32

ii. It is made clear that such payment of Tax, Interest, fine / fee and etc. shall not be allowed to be made or adjusted from and out of any Input Tax Credit which may be lying unutilized or unclaimed in the hands of these petitioners.

¶33

_____________ Page 3 of 6_

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.7796 of 2025

¶36

iii. If any Input Tax Credit has remained utilized, it shall not be utilised until it is scrutinized and approved by an appropriate or a competent officer of the Department.

¶37

iv. Only such approved Input Tax Credit shall be allowed for being utilized thereafter for discharging future tax liability under the Act and Rule.

¶38

v. The petitioners shall also pay GST and file the returns for the period subsequent to the cancellation of the registration by declaring the correct value of supplies and payment of GST shall also be in cash.

¶39

vi. If any Input Tax Credit was earned, it shall be allowed to be utilised only after scrutinising and approving by the respondents or any other competent authority.

¶40

vii. The respondents may also impose such restrictions / limitation on petitioners as may be warranted to ensure that there is no undue passing of Input Tax Credit pending such exercise and to ensure that there is no violation or an attempt to do bill trading by taking advantage of this order.

¶41

viii. On payment of tax, penalty and uploading of returns, the registration shall stand revived forthwith.

¶42

ix. The respondents shall take suitable steps by instructing GST Network, New Delhi, to make suitable changes in the architecture of the GST Web portal to allow these petitioners to file their returns and to pay the tax/penalty/fine.

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶45

W.P.(MD)No.7796 of 2025

¶46

x. The above exercise shall be carried out by the respondents within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶47

xi. No cost.

¶48

xii. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.''