Case Details: Shriyaa Enterprises vs. State Tax Officer - [2025] 181 taxmann.com 655 (Bombay)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- M.S. Sonak & Advait M. Sethna, JJ.
-
Keval Shah for the Petitioner.
-
Himanshu Takke, Amar Mishra, AGPs & Siddharth Chandrashekhar for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioners challenged the cancellation of their registration by the jurisdictional officer under the CGST Act on the ground of non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months. It was submitted that one petitioner had undergone a cardiology-related medical procedure. At the same time, the other faced severe financial constraints, resulting in the non-filing of returns within the prescribed time. It was affirmed that they were ready and willing to discharge the entire tax dues, along with applicable interest and penalties, for the relevant periods within 15 days from the date of intimation. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the explanations offered by the petitioners for non-filing of returns did not appear to be mala fide or unreasonable, particularly since the default periods were proximate to and overlapped with the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court submitted that there were no allegations of unlawful activity or revenue fraud by the petitioners. The Court, upon construing Section 29 of the CGST Act held that registration may be restored where sufficient cause exists and compliance is undertaken. It was directed the cancellation orders shall be quashed.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Azaria corp LLP v. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax [2025] 178 taxmann.com 618/112 GST 166 (Bombay) (Para 13) followed
List of Cases Referred to
- Azaria corp LLP v. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax [2025] 178 taxmann.com 618/112 GST 166 (Bombay) (para 6).
The post GST Registration Restored for Non-Malafide Return Defaults | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
