Delhi High Court for a particular case revealing the GST registration has cancelled the order issued in non-consideration of the revision application for clear error.
The applicant Bansal steels have furnished the writ petition by hoping that within the respondent the rules to be provided in order to amend the cancellation order of the applicant’s GST registration.
For the GST registration, the cancellation would be applied by the applicant dated 4.12.2018 for the first time, mentioning that the cause for asking for this cancellation was that the same does not close its business.
On the date 11.02.2019, the stated application was denied. The applicant again files another application for the cancellation of GST registration. Since it seeks through it and thus it was accepted and its registration was cancelled by order dated 12.02.2019 with effect from 01.02.2018.
The respondent did not grant the applicant’s demand for amending the apparent error in the application of the applicant and therefore, in the order dated 12.02.2019. The applicant files a writ petition against this order.
Rakesh Kumar petitioners counsel laid on the decision of the RPG Polymers v. Commissioner of DGST Delhi and Anr, stated that the errors, which are apparent on the face of the record, needed to be rectified under Section 161 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Respondent’s counsel R. Ramachandran held as the applicant has shown its reasons to seek the cancellation in its initial application on 04.12.2018 as the business closure, no question was there of the applicant that files any GST returns for the duration post to that. The applicant’s request for rectification of the order on 12.02.2019 was so late.
The Division bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan authorized the writ petition that is filed through the applicant post acknowledging the conflicts of both parties, found that in the respondent’s conflicts, no basis to doubt the applicant’s statement that it urged for the GST registration cancellation from 01.02.2018 was a clear error. It is clear that the applicant intends to ask for the cancellation of the registration from 01.02.2019 and would have furnished the returns by Jan 2019.
| Case Title | Bansal Steels vs The Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax |
| Citation | W.P.(C) 17439/2022 and CM No. 10005/2023 |
| Date | 01.03.2023 |
| Respondent | Mr R. Ramachandran, Senior Standing Counsel |
| Delhi High Court | Read Order |
