Kerala HC in the case of Loafers Corner Cafe Versus Union of India
Loafers Corner Cafe
Union of India
Facts of the Case:
The petitioner, which is a partnership firm, has approached this Court aggrieved by the delay occasioned by the respondent in cancelling an earlier registration and granting him a new registration under the GST Act. It is the case of the petitioner that, while under the original registration it had opted for payment of tax on the normal basis, it had since filed an application for a fresh GST registration on 19.06.2018 so that it could opt for the compounded scheme for payment of tax in respect of the business carried on by the firm. It is not in dispute that the new registration sought for was allotted to it subsequently, but in the meanwhile, during the period between the date of application for the new registration and the grant of the same consequent to a cancellation of the earlier registration, the return filed by the petitioner under the composition scheme could not be uploaded into the system, since the system recognized only the earlier registration which was not under the compounded scheme. It is, therefore, that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to make necessary changes in the portal so as to enable the petitioner to file returns for the period from October 2018 to December 2018, January 2019 to March 2019, April 2019 to June 2019, July 2019 to September 2019, October 2019 to December 2019 and January 2020 to March 2020 without charging any late fee or other charges for the delayed uploading.
On a consideration of the rival submission, I note that inasmuch as it is not in dispute that the petitioner had applied for a cancellation of its earlier registration as early as on 22.05.2018 and had applied for a new registration on 19.06.2018, the mere fact that the respondents took time to process the said applications, and pass orders thereon approving the cancellation application as also granting the new registration, cannot be a reason to treat the interim period as one in which the petitioner cannot get the benefit of the compounding scheme which he had opted through its application for new registration. The delayed processing of the application submitted by the petitioner cannot be a reason to deprive the petitioner of the statutory benefit that he had claimed through the application in question.
The Decision of the Court:
I, therefore, allow this writ petition by directing the respondents to make the necessary changes in the portal so as to enable the petitioner to file the returns for the period aforementioned without charging the petitioner any late fee or other charges on account of the delay occasioned by the respondent. The respondent shall do the needful to facilitate the uploading of the returns aforementioned, and the availment of the applicable input tax credit, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the respondents for further action.