BharatTaxGST

Sagarika Bhol vs. The Comnr, CGST, Cx And Customs, Bbsr

Original PDF →
WP(C)/18218/2024HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01055189202402 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 W.P.(C) No.18218 of 2024 Sagarika Bhol …. Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. Gourav Kumar Roy Choudhury, Advocate -versus- The Commissioner, CGST, CX & Customs and another …. Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Mr. A. Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO Order No.

ORDER 02.08.2024

01.

1. Mr. Roy Choudhury, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 29th January, 2022 followed by order dated 24th May, 2023 cancelling his client’s registration under Central 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

// 2 //

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. Kedia, learned advocate, Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the department. We notice he had appeared in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (supra).

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 Sks

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.