The court also ordered the respondents to reactivate the GST portal within one week, enabling the petitioner to file returns and pay off all liabilities. However, the court specified that if the petitioner fails to meet the compliance requirements within four weeks, the writ petition would stand dismissed automatically.
In a significant ruling, in case of Biswajit Basu vs Superintendent of CGST & Central Excise (WPA 14229 of 2024), the Calcutta High Court has directed the restoration of a cancelled GST registration, provided that the petitioner files all overdue returns and pays the required taxes, interest, and penalties. This decision came in response to a writ petition filed by Biswajit Basu, who challenged two key orders—one canceling his GST registration dated 15th January 2020, and another, an appellate order dated 15th April 2024, dismissing his appeal on the grounds of being time-barred under Section 107 of the GST Act.
The case stemmed from a show-cause notice issued to the petitioner on 25th November 2019, citing non-filing of returns for six consecutive months. This led to the cancellation of his GST registration under the provisions of the WB GST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that the pre-COVID situation hindered his ability to respond to the cancellation notice, and he subsequently filed an appeal without seeking revocation under Section 107.
During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Chatterjee, stated that the petitioner was willing to comply with all provisions of the GST Act if given an opportunity. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent, Mr. Bhanja, maintained that the cancellation was a result of the petitioner’s failure to comply with the law, with no malice involved.
The court observed that the cancellation was solely due to non-filing of GST returns, with no allegations of tax evasion. It further noted that cancelling the registration would impede the petitioner’s business and limit revenue recovery. In light of this, the court urged the respondents to adopt a practical approach and allow the petitioner to resume business operations.
Referring to a previous judgment in the case of Subhankar Golder v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (MAT 639 of 2024) on 9th April 2024, the court set aside the order dated 15th January 2020 that had cancelled the petitioner’s GST registration. The bench, presided over by Judge Raja Basu Chowdhury, directed that the petitioner’s registration be restored, contingent on completing all pending filings and settling taxes, interest, fines, and penalties.
The court also ordered the respondents to reactivate the GST portal within one week, enabling the petitioner to file returns and pay off all liabilities. The appellate order dated 15th April 2024 was set aside, and the writ petition was disposed of. However, the court specified that if the petitioner fails to meet the compliance requirements within four weeks, the writ petition would stand dismissed automatically.
This ruling reinforces the importance of compliance in GST matters while offering relief to businesses affected by technical or administrative lapses in the process.
READ MORE
Clarification on Advertising Services Provided to Foreign Clients: Circular No. 230/24/2024-GST
Waiver of Interest and Penalty under Section 128A of CGST Act 2017