TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notifications. Without moving an application for revocation the petitioner has straightaway thought of preferring an appeal before the appellate authority and which now stands decided vide Annexure P/2 dated 30.09.2021. Without availing the remedy of revocation which was permissible under the ROD dated 25.06.2020 and subsequent notification dated 29.08.2021 followed by the clarificatory circular issued on 06.09.2021, the petitioner as such cannot claim any advantage of showing justification for the delay in the filing of the appeal beyond the permissible period of limitation under the Act. Further contention of the petitioner also is that the petitioner was an IBC Company and for which there was a circular No.134/04/2020-GST dated 23.03. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Appeals Commissionerate, Raipur in Appeal Case No.138(GST)/2021, the present writ petition has been filed. Vide the said order the appellate authority has rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 on the ground of limitation. 2. For proper understanding of the dispute it would be relevant to take note of the fact that the grievance of the petitioner was the order of cancellation of registration. The order of cancellation of registration was passed by the competent authority on 04.09.2019. The said order was an appealable order and the appeal was required to be filed within a period of three months and the act prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he cancellation of registration and which was extended to even those persons whose application for revocation earlier stood rejected and also in respect of those persons whose appeal also was either pending or decided earlier. 5. However, perusal of the pleadings would reveal that inspite of all these circulars and notifications that have been issued by the Central Government the petitioner as such has not moved any application for revocation during the period that was extended by way of the aforesaid circulars and notifications. Without moving an application for revocation the petitioner has straightaway thought of preferring an appeal before the appellate authority and which now stands decided vide Annexure P/2 dated 30.09.2021. Withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
