Double D Construction PVT. LTD., Khordha vs. The Commissioner, The Dept. Of Finance, Govt. Of Odisha, Cuttack

Original PDF →
WP(C)/20364/2024HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01060827202427 August 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,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 WP(C) No.20364 of 2024 Double D Construction Pvt. Ltd., Khordha …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.- Mr. S. Priyadarshan, Advocate -versus- The Commissioner, The Department of Finance, Govt. of Odisha, Cuttack and others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.- Mr. S. Das, Advocate (Addl. Standing Counsel for O.P. nos.1 and 2) Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Advocate (Sr. Standing Counsel for O.P. no.3) CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

ORDER 27.08.2024

1.

Mr. Priyadarshan, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 4th November, 2023 followed by order dated 22nd December, 2023 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, Order No. 01. 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.

2.

Mr. Das, learned advocate, Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of opposite party nos.1 and 2 and Mr. Satapathy, learned advocate, Senior Standing Counsel, for opposite party no.3. 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 ) Judge

( 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.