Priya Trading Co. vs. The Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Priya Trading Co., through its proprietor Rinki Devi, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court seeking restoration of its GST registration. The petitioner also sought to quash an order dated July 22, 2021, issued by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Madhepura Circle, which cancelled the petitioner's GSTIN. The petitioner had previously filed an appeal against the cancellation order. However, this appeal was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals), Purnea Division, on the grounds of delay and being barred by limitation. The petitioner's counsel then sought liberty to challenge this appellate order dated January 25, 2024, by availing the remedy under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Held
The Court noted that the petitioner's appeal against the order cancelling its GST registration had been dismissed by the appellate authority on the grounds of delay and being barred by limitation. The petitioner's counsel sought liberty to challenge this appellate order, dated January 25, 2024, by availing the remedy provided under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court granted this liberty. Consequently, the present writ petition was disposed of as the petitioner intended to pursue the statutory remedy available under Section 112 of the Act. The Court did not decide on the merits of the GST registration cancellation or the restoration of the registration itself, as the petitioner was granted liberty to pursue a higher statutory appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to restore its GST registration, considering it has furnished returns for the period in question? 2. Whether the order dated July 22, 2021, cancelling the petitioner's GSTIN, is liable to be quashed? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that they had furnished the returns for the period in question and therefore, their GST registration should be restored. They also sought to quash the cancellation order. Revenue/State's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents. However, it notes that the petitioner's appeal against the cancellation order was dismissed by the appellate authority on the grounds of delay and limitation.
Sections Cited
Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH) 3 13-03-2026 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- “(i) For issuance of a writ of mandamus for directing the respondents to restore the GST registration of the petitioner with immediate effect as the petitioner has already furnished the return of the period in question.
Patna High Court CWJC No.18188 of 2025(3) dt.13-03-2026 2/2 (ii) For issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order contained in memo with reference number ZA10071275396M dated 22-07- 2021 issued by respondent no-5 (Annexure-P/3) through which the GSTIN of petitioner has been cancelled.”
Admittedly, the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground of delay and being barred by limitation.
In view of the aforesaid, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to challenge the appellate order dated 25.01.2024 passed by the learned Court of Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Purnea Division, Purnea, which has rightly not been assailed in the present writ petition, by availing the remedy provided for under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Liberty, so sought, is granted.
Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
GAURAV S./- (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) (Arun Kumar Jha, J) U
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.