The Rajasthan High Court ruled that the applicant is allowed to submit an ITC claim when the department regards the matter of revocation of GST registration cancellation.
The bench of two judges, Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice Praveer Bhatnagar, has instructed the agency to apply for the re-establishment of its GST registration before the competent authority. It should regard and determine the application filed by the applicant firm considering the notification dated March 31, 2023, issued by the competent authority under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 rapidly.
The petitioner-firm questioned the order dated February 2, 2022, passed by the respondent, by which the applicant firm’s GST registration has been rejected because of the non-filing of its GST return. The Appellate Authority has also disapproved of the appeal filed by the petitioner firm against the order.
In the course of awaiting the petition, the competent authority under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 issued a notification dated March 31, 2023. According to the notification, the disapproval of the registration resulting from the non-filing of the GST return could be cancelled if the conditions are met.
The court concluded that the issue of the petitioner-firm is protected by the notification dated March 31, 2023, and the applicant firm can file an application before the competent authority requesting the re-establishment of its GST registration subject to fulfilment of the conditions.
Read Also: KA HC Allows Superintendent to Revoke GSTIN Cancellation Order After GST Filing
The court said, “When the competent authority considers the issue of revocation of cancellation of petitioner firm GST registration under the notification dated 31-03-2023, the petitioner-firm, shall be entitled to lodge its claim for availing of Input Tax Credit in respect of the period from the cancellation of the registration till the registration is restored”.
|Case Title||M/s R.K. Jewelers Versus The Union of India|
|Case No.||D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4236/2023|
|Counsel for Appellant||Prahlad Singh|
|Counsel for Respondent||Hemant Dutt, Kuldeep Vaishnav|
|Rajasthan HC||Read Order|