M/S Sri Sri Sri Gopinath Pani Panchayat Gandala vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Ganjam Ii Circle

Original PDF →
WP(C)/6974/2025HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01016366202524 March 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA (ACJ),MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO2 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.6974 of 2025 M/s. Sri Sri Sri Gopinath Pani Panchayat Gandala …. Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. B. Panda, Advocate -versus- Superintendent of CGST and Central Excise, Ganjam-II Circle …. Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. A. Kedia, Jr. SC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

ORDER 24.03.2025

1.

Mr. Panda, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 3rd January, 2024 followed by order dated 19th April, 2024 cancelling his client’s registration under Odisha 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, Order No. 01. // 2 //

Odisha, Cuttack and others). He submits, his client’s claim to relief including prayer for condonation of delay is covered by said order.

2.

Mr. Kedia, learned advocate, Jr. Standing Counsel appears on behalf of revenue.

3.

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.

4.

The writ petition is disposed of.

(Arindam Sinha)

Acting Chief Justice

(M.S. Sahoo)

Judge Prasant

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.