Dismissed

M/s Om Food Products Industries v. The Union of India

Patna HC29 Jul 2024CWJC/5953/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a petitioner's GST registration. Court held that the petitioner was negligent in failing to avail the appellate remedy within the stipulated limitation period and did not utilize the government's amnesty scheme.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with no relief granted to the petitioner.

M/s Om Food Products Industries Vs The Union of India — GST and Indirect Tax | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5953 of 2024

¶2

======================================================

¶3

M/s Om Food Products Industries having its registered office at Industrial Area, Deona Tilarath, Barauni Industrial Area, Begusarai, Bihar- 851122 through its Proprietor namely Chandradeep Kumar, Son of- Late Siya Ram Singh, resident of- Ward No.- 14, Lakho, Lakho, P.S.- Begusarai Muffasil, District- Begusarai.

¶4

Chandradeep Kumar, Son of- Late Siya Ram Singh, resident of Ward No. 14, Lakho, Lakho, P.S.- Begusarai Muffasil, District- Begusarai.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Union of India through Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.

¶8

The Commissioner of Appeal, State Goods and Service Tax, Darbhanga, Bihar.

¶9

The Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Begusarai.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Smita Kumari, Advocate Mr. Arbind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, Sr. Advocate (ASGI) Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX Mr. Shivaditya Dhari Sinha, Advocate ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶13

Date : 29-07-2024

¶14

The petitioner is aggrieved with the order of cancellation of registration passed on 05.01.2022.

¶15

Admittedly, there is an appellate remedy which the petitioner availed with gross delay.

¶16

Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“BGST Act” hereafter) permits an appeal to be filed

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.5953 of 2024 dt.29-07-2024 2/3

¶18

within three months and also apply for delay condonation with satisfactory reasons within a further period of one month. We have to take into account the saving of limitation granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, In Re: Cognizance For Extension of Limitation . Therein, due to the pandemic situation limitation was saved between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022. It was also directed that an appeal could be filed within ninety days from 01.03.2022. Here, the order impugned in the appeal was dated 05.01.2022. An appeal was to be filed on or before 30.05.2022, as permitted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and if necessary with a delay condonation application within one month thereafter. The appeal is said to have been filed only on 14.09.2023, after about one year four months from the date on which even the extended limitation period expired.

¶19

Further, the Government had come out with an Amnesty Scheme by Circular No. 3 of 2023, by which the registered dealers, whose registrations were cancelled were permitted to restore their registration on payment of all dues between 31.03.2023 to 31.08.2023. The petitioner did not avail of such remedy also.

¶20

In the above circumstances, we find no reason to

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.5953 of 2024 dt.29-07-2024 3/3

¶22

invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, especially since it is not a measure to be employed where there are alternate remedies available and the assessee has not been diligent in availing such alternate remedies within the stipulated time. The law favours the diligent and not the indolent.

¶23

The petitioner does not have any case that the show-cause notice was not received. Further, it is also pertinent that the reason stated in the show-cause notice for cancellation of registration is that the petitioner has not filed returns for a continuous period of six months. The petitioner does not have a case that they had in fact filed a return in the continuous period of six months.

¶24

The writ petition would stand dismissed.

¶25

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

¶26

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶27

avinash/-

¶28

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
Uploading Date	31.07.2024
Transmission Date	N/A

M/s Om Food Products Industries v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Om Food Products Industries v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhrub Narayan Lal Karn @ Dhrub Narayan Karn Vs The State of Bihar

Aim of People (Society) Vs The State of Bihar

Shree Azad Transport Company Private Ltd. Vs The State of Bihar

Pec Limited, Vs The State Of Bihar

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Vs M/s Khushee Construction through its Power of Attorney Holder

The State of Bihar Vs M/s Khushee Construction through its Power of Attorney Holder