Heard Mr. Shaik Madar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B.Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Ms. B.Kavitha Yadav, learned counsel for respondent No.1; and Ms. Sapna Reddy, learned counsel for respondents No.2, 3 and 4.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 27.08.2022 passed by respondent No.3 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner and confirming the order dated 14.12.2019 passed by respondent No.4 cancelling the registration certificate of the petitioner.

3. Petitioner is a company engaged in the business of real estate and renting. It is registered under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) bearing registration No.36AAOCA6272FIZH.

4. On the ground that petitioner did not submit GST returns for more than six months, show cause notice dated 23.04.2019 was issued by respondent No.4 to the petitioner, to which petitioner submitted reply on 02.05.2019. However, on the ground that petitioner had not filed GST returns continuously for more than six months, respondent No.4 cancelled the GST registration under Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, vide the order dated 14.12.2019.

5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, petitioner preferred appeal before respondent No.3. However, by the order-inappeal dated 27.08.2022, respondent No.3 dismissed the appeal on the point of limitation as well as on the ground that the order of cancellation of registration was not challenged.

6. Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in W.P.No.27071 of 2022 (M/s. Chenna Krishnama Charyulu Karampudi v. Additional Commissioner (Appeals-I)) decided on 27.06.2022.

7. Relevant portion of the order dated 27.06.2022 reads as under:

“5. On a query by the Court as to why petitioner has not approached the Goods and Services Tax Tribunal (GST Tribunal) under Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (briefly, ‘CGST Act’ hereinafter), learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date no GST Tribunal has been constituted.

6. We have perused the order dated 19.04.2022. This is an order passed by the first appellate authority under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act. As per subsection (1) of Section 107 of the CGST Act, limitation for filing appeal is three months from the date of communication of the order appealed against. Under subsection (4) of Section 107 of the CGST Act, the appellate authority may allow the appeal to be presented within a further period of one month, provided sufficient cause is shown by the appellant.

7. Though the lower appellate authority may be right in holding that while it may allow filing of an appeal beyond the limitation of three months for a further period of one month, therefore, by extension of limitation beyond the extended period of one month delay beyond the extended period of one month cannot be condoned, we are of the view that such a stand taken by respondent No.1 may adversely affect the petitioner. This is more so because respondent No.2 had suo motu cancelled the GST registration of the petitioner on the ground of non-filing of returns and as GST Tribunal has not been constituted under Section 109 of the CGST Act, petitioner would be left without any remedy.

8. We further find that the issue pertains to cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and proper if the entire matter is remanded back to respondent No.2 to reconsider the case of the petitioner and thereafter to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

9. In the light of the above and without expressing any opinion on merit, we remand the matter back to the file of respondent No.2 to consider the grievance expressed by the petitioner against cancellation of GST registration and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. Needless to say, when the respondent No.2 hears the matter on remand, petitioner shall submit all the returns as per the statute.”

8. Accordingly and in the light of the above, order of respondent No.4 dated 14.12.2019 as well as order of respondent No.3 dated 27.08.2022 are hereby set aside and quashed. The matter is remanded back to the file of respondent No.4 to consider the grievance expressed by the petitioner against cancellation of GST registration and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. Needless to say, at the time of hearing the matter on remand, petitioner shall submit all the returns as per the statute.

9. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merit and all contentions are kept open.

10. This disposes of the writ petition. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.