Saumya Ranjan Moharana vs. State Tax Officer, Jagatsinghpur

Original PDF →
WP(C)/13224/2025HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01033229202516 May 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE HARISH TANDON (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN2 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.13224 of 2025 Saumya Ranjan Moharana …. Petitioner Mr. M.L. Agarwal, Advocate -versus- State Tax Officer, Jagatsinghpur Circle, Paradeep and another …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Das, Additional Standing Counsel Mr. A. Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No.

ORDER 16.05.2025 01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2.

Mr. M.L. Agarwal, learned Advocate appears on behalf of Petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 08.08.2022 followed by order dated 11.01.2023 cancelling her client’s registration under State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He submits, his client is ready and willing to pay the tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other sum required to be paid for the return form of his client to be accepted by the Department. He relies on order dated 16th November, 2022 of coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others). He submits, his client’s claim to relief including prayer for condonation of delay is covered by said order.

3.

Mr. S. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Department and Mr. A. Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Central Revenue.

4.

We reproduce below paragraph-2 from said order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (supra).

“2. In that view of the matter, the delay in Petitioner’s invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned and it is directed that subject to the Petitioner depositing all the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc., due and complying with other formalities, the Petitioner’s application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law.”

Likewise direction is made in this writ petition. Petitioner gets the relief in the interest of revenue.

5.

The writ petition is disposed of.

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman) Judge MRS/Laxmikant

Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.