Shelesh Kumar v. The Union Of India
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18390 of 2023 ====================================================== Shelesh Kumar through its Proprietor Shelesh Kumar aged about 50 years, male, son of Ganesh Choudhary, resident of Kurshandi, P.S.-Purani, DistrictMadhepura, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The Union of India through the Commissioner of Central GST, Patna. 2.
Superintendent, Central GST, Madhepura, Purnea, Bihar. 3.
Joint Commissioner of CGST and CX (Appeal), Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs.Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Dr. K.N.Singh, ASG Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 23-01-2024 The petitioner is aggrieved with the cancellation of registration by Annexure-1 order passed on 01.03.2021.
2. Admittedly, there is an appellate remedy which the petitioner availed with gross delay.
3. Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("BGST Act" hereafter) permits an appeal to be filed 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.18390 of 2023 dt.23-01-2024 2/3 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 17.03.2021. An appeal was to be filed on or before 30.06.2022 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 15.10.2023, after about one year three months seventeen days from the date on which even the extended limitation period expired. In the above circumstances, we find no reason to 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.
4. The petitioner does not have any case that the show-cause notice was not received by him. 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.18390 of 2023 dt.23-01-2024 3/3 does not have a case that he had in fact filed a return in the continuous period of six months.
5. The writ petition would stand dismissed.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Rajiv Roy, J) sujit/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 24.01.2024 Transmission Date