High Court allowed revocation of registration taking care of Article 21 of the Constitution

Rohit Enterprises Versus Commissioner State GST Aurangabad [Bombay High Court]

Facts: Since the petitioner had undergone angioplasty, and the firm suffered financial set back in pandemic situation, GST returns from August 2021 could not be filed. Resultantly, the Proper Officer cancelled the registration of the petitioner. The Dy. Commissioner/State Tax (Appeal), rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation.

Held: The provisions of GST enactment cannot be interpreted so as to deny right to carry on Trade and Commerce to any citizen and subjects. The constitutional guarantee is unconditional and unequivocal and must be enforced regardless of shortcomings in the scheme of GST enactment. The right to carry on trade or profession cannot be curtailed contrary to the constitutional guarantee under Art. 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. If the person like petitioner is not allowed to revive the registration, the state would suffer loss of revenue and the ultimate goal under GST regime will stand defeated.

The petitioner, who is sufferer of unique circumstances resulting from pandemic and his health barriers, would be put to great hardship for want of GST registration. The petitioner who is small scale entrepreneur cannot carry on production activities in absence of GST registration. Resultantly, his right to livelihood would be affected.

The order suspending the GST registration are quashed and set aside - Petition allowed.