Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M/S.Srivalli Shipping And Transport ... vs The Union Of India, on 26 September, 2022
Author: C. Praveen Kumar
Bench: C. Praveen Kumar
1
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No.: W.P. No. 21541 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.
ORDER
No DATE
13 26.09.2022 CPK, J & AVRB, J
I.A. No. 3 of 2022
The present Interlocutory Application
came to be filed seeking suspension of
Proceedings, dated 19.08.2022, issued by
Respondent No. 3.
As seen from the record, initially a show- cause notice was issued on 04.05.2022 for cancellation of registration. The reason given in the show-cause notice for cancellation of registration is that, the Petitioner has not filed returns for six months. Accordingly, he was directed to furnish reply within 30 days from the date of service of notice and the date of personal hearing was fixed on 03.06.2022. Though, a reply was said to have been given, an Order came to be passed on 19.08.2022 stating that, there was no reply to the show-cause notice and no returns for more than six months 2 has been filed. But a perusal of the first sentence of the Order itself would indicate that, there was a response to the notice, dated 04.05.2022, by way of a reply on 04.06.2022. It is also to be noted that, in the Order, the amount payable was shown as "zero", but at the same time, he was directed to pay the amount, failing which, the amount would be recovered.
From the above, it is clear that, while the show-cause notice dated 04.05.2022 contemplates giving of a reply within a period of one month from the date of service of the notice and though a reply, even as per the Order, was given on 04.06.2022, strangely the Order passed on 19.08.2022 states that there was no reply to the show-cause notice, which was made the ground to pass the cancellation Order.
Challenging the show-cause notice itself, the present Writ Petition came to be filed. Pending Writ Petition, the Order, dated 19.08.2022, came to be passed, which came to be challenged by way of an additional affidavit seeking amendment of the prayer.
3
It is also to be noted here that, the Petitioner herein made an application under Section 30 of the Act, seeking authorities to revoke the cancellation Order passed. Hence, this Court on 06.09.2022, directed the authorities to pass an order on the said application made under Section 30 of the Act.
An Order came to be passed on 12.09.2022, in which, the request vide reply dated 29.08.2022, was rejected, as the Petitioner was due a sum of Rs.12,43,17,510/- as such, revocation under Section 30 of the Act could be contrary to Rule 23 of CGST Rules.
Again on 19.09.2022, another Order came to be passed rejecting the revocation for cancellation stating that the Petitioners has not responded to the Notice, dated 08.09.2022, within the time specified.
Insofar as this rejection order is concerned, the case of the Petitioner is that, he is not aware of any show-cause notice issued on 08.09.2022.
4
From the above, prima facie, it indicates that the reason given now for rejection is the Petitioner being due a sum of Rs.12,43,17,510/- to the Respondents, which was not the case in the earlier show-cause notice. Though, subsequent events are not specifically challenged, except the Order, dated 19.08.2022, but all the documents are brought on record to show the defense of the Petitioner that, since the Petitioner requested the GST Officials to take action against RINL for payment of the amount due by them to him, the authorities are proceedings against the Petitioner with a malafide intention.
It is also to be noted here that, neither the show-cause notice, dated 04.05.2022, nor the Order passed on 19.08.2022 indicate the months for which the Petitioner has not filed its returns. But the letter, dated 09.06.2022, written by the Petitioner requesting the GST authorities to collect GST on monthly installments, in terms of Section 80 of the Act, show payment of Rs. 9,38,40,807/- @ 5 Rs.39,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Only) per month. In the said letter, the Petitioner refers to an amount of Rs.3.80 Crores due from RastriyaIspat Nigam Limited.
Pending Writ Petition, the Petitioner filed I.A. No. 2 of 2022 seeking four [04] reliefs, (i) Challenging the Order, dated 19.08.2022, cancelling the registration, (ii) rejecting the request of the Petitioner to pay the pending dues in installments in terms of Section 80 of the CGST Act, (iii) issuing the DRC-13 notices to the customer of the Petitioner without passing any orders under Section 78 of CGST Act, is violative of Rules 21 and 22 and Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, and (iv) to pay compensation of Rs.50.00 Crores.
Insofar as reliefs in (iii) and (iv) are concerned, we feel that it requires a counter from the respondents.
Considering the request made in Serial (i) and (ii), we feel ends of justice would be met by suspending the Order, dated 19.08.2022, initially for a period of eight [08] weeks subject 6 to the Petitioner depositing Rs.1,00,00,000/- [Rupees One Crore Only] within a period of four [04] weeks from today.
List after eight [08] weeks. Meanwhile, counter, if any, to be filed by the Respondents.
_____________________ C. Praveen Kumar, J _____________________ A V Ravindra Babu, J Note:
Issue C.C. today B/o.
SM..