Shree Shankar Infratech PVT. LTD. vs. The Commnr. CT And GST, Odisha

Held

The Court condoned the delay in the petitioner's application for revocation under the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules. The Court directed that upon the petitioner depositing all due taxes, interest, penalty, and late fee, and complying with other necessary formalities, their application for revocation would be considered in accordance with the law. The petitioner was instructed to produce a downloaded copy of the order before the proper officer. Subject to the petitioner fulfilling the stated conditions, the proper officer was directed to open the portal to enable the petitioner to file their GST return. The Court also noted that if any appeal had been filed in the interim, it would be rendered infructuous by this order and the Appellate Authority would be informed accordingly. The writ petition was disposed of in these terms.

Facts

The petitioner, Shree Shankar Infratech Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack. The core of the dispute involved the petitioner's inability to file a GST return, likely due to a delay in filing a revocation application under Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules. The Opposite Parties, represented by the Commissioner, CT and GST, Odisha, and others, stated that they would accept the petitioner's 3B Return Form if the delay in filing the revocation application was condoned and the petitioner paid all outstanding taxes, interest, penalty, and late fees. The Court was asked to consider the petitioner's request for condonation of delay and acceptance of their GST return.

Key Issues

1. Whether the delay in filing the application for revocation under the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules should be condoned? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought condonation of delay in filing their revocation application, implying a procedural impediment prevented them from filing their GST return. Revenue's Argument: The Opposite Parties, through the Additional Standing Counsel, stated that they would accept the petitioner's 3B Return Form, provided the delay in filing the revocation application was condoned and the petitioner complied with all payment obligations (taxes, interest, penalty, and late fee). They did not contest the principle of condoning delay under such circumstances.