Safarulla Padikkal vs. State Tax Officer And Others
(Kerala High Court, Kerala)

Case Law
Petitioner / Applicant
Safarulla Padikkal
State Tax Officer And Others
Kerala High Court
Dec 7, 2020
Order No.
WP(C). No.19436 of 2020(D)
TR Citation
2020 (12) TR 3591
Related HSN Chapter/s
Related HSN Code


The petitioner, a tax payer under the CGST and SGST Act 2017 who has been issued a TIN Number, a registered works contractor under the KVAT Act prior to the introduction of GST in July 2017, through the instant writ petition has approached this Court for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to accept the request for access to GST portal enabling the petitioner to upload return for the periods from the implementation of GST with a further direction to the respondents to accept revised return from 2017 to March 2018. It is submitted that from 31.3.2018, the petitioner has not been able to access the portal and upload the returns. Petitioner had requested the department to rectification of return but no action has been taken. The petitioner has filed the income tax return as evidenced from Exts.P4 and P5.

2. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader submitted that the request of the petitioner for composition was forwarded to the Joint Commissioner, SGSTD, Kannur vide communication dated 18.11.2019 and 7.1.2020. On receipt of the information, it surfaced that the common portal would only allow to file GSTR 4 and not for composition. The petitioner had also been communicated about this fact vide communication dated 16.1.2020. It is submitted that there is no proof that the GST portal of the petitioner has been blocked after 31.3.2018.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, appraised the paper book and of the view that there is no force and merit in the submission of the counsel for the petitioner. There is no proof that the petitioner had actually opted for the portal. The composition is not permitted as the portal only permits for filing of the GSTR 4. The aforementioned communication has already been given to the petitioner vide letter dated 16.1.2020. There is no explanation as to how and in what manner the petitioner has not been able to open the portal nor any photo copy of the proof has been attached or the circumstances in which the returns could not have been accepted is not explained.

The contention of the petitioner is baseless, devoid of merit and no ground for interference is made out. Writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.

  • Home
  • /
  • caselaw
  • /
  • safarulla padikkal vs state tax officer and others high court order kerala 3591

BUSY is a simple, yet powerful GST / VAT compliant Business Accounting Software that has everything you need to grow your business.

phone Sales & Support:

+91 82 82 82 82 82
+91 11 - 4096 4096