In a recent judgment the Delhi High Court in the case of M/s Mahadev Traders vs. Union of India & Ors., W.P(C) 4321/2020 has passed a very important judgment. In this case the Hon’ble Court was of the view that the functionality of the common portal should be in accordance with law and it should be vice versa that the law is interpreted in accordance with the functionality available on the common portal.
The facts of the case were that the Petitioner had inadvertently applied for cancellation of his registration certificate on 6th November, 2018.
On realizing its mistake the Petitioner had written a letter on 19.02.2019 for withdrawal of the application for cancellation of registration. However on 8th April, 2020, the registration of the Petitioner was cancelled with retrospective effect from 6th November, 2018 by the Proper Officer.
Being aggrieved by the order of cancellation the Petitioner filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority vide its order dated 15th June, 2020 set aside the registration cancellation order and allows the restoration of its registration.
However, the Appellate Authority or the Proper Officer was not able to implement the order of the Appellate Authority and was not able to restore the registration certificate of the Petitioner. It was stated by the GSTIN that it is not possible to revoke or restore the GST registration Certificate in cases where the applicant has voluntarily applied for cancellation and his cancellation request has been accepted by the Proper Officer.
That being aggrieved by this stand of the GSTIN, the Petitioner had approached the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. The Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that the common portal has to sub-serve the law and not vice-a-versa. The council for GSTIN gave a statement that they are in the process of developing the utility wherein the registration certificate of such class of cancelled dealers can be restored.
The matter was argued by the Advocate Vineet Bhatia.