Avadh Enterprises vs. Commissioner Of The CGST
Held
The Court held that the petitioner should be permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. The reasoning was based on a prior judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench in Writ Petition (M/B) No.39 of 2025, which dealt with a similar situation. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of GST registration cancellation due to non-filing of returns, the petitioner can be allowed to apply for revocation if they comply with certain conditions. The operative direction was that the petitioner must move the application for revocation within two weeks from the date of the order. Additionally, the petitioner must furnish all pending returns and deposit the unpaid tax along with applicable interest and penalty. Upon receipt of such an application and compliance, the Competent Authority shall consider the prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks. The issue of costs was decided with no order as to costs.
Facts
The petitioner, Avadh Enterprises, is a taxable person registered under the GST Act, 2017. Their GST registration was cancelled by the Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3, via an order dated 12.03.2024. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period, as indicated in the show cause notice dated 23.02.2024. The petitioner challenged this cancellation order by filing a writ petition. The present writ petition (No. 60 (M/B) of 2026) is being disposed of in terms of a previous judgment dated 17.03.2025 in Writ Petition (M/B) No.71 of 2025, which itself followed an order in Writ Petition (M/B) No.39 of 2025.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to make an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, and if so, under what conditions. This issue turns on the interpretation and application of principles governing the cancellation of GST registration and the possibility of revocation. The petitioner argued that a similar order should be passed in their case, allowing them to apply for revocation. The respondents (Commissioner of CGST, Dehradun, and others) stated they had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order. The court had to decide whether to grant this relief and on what terms, considering the petitioner's failure to file returns.
Sections Cited
GST Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT: (per SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.)
Learned counsel for the parties submit that the instant writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 17.03.2025, rendered in Writ Petition (M/B) No.71 of 2025, which came to be passed following the order in Writ Petition (M/B) No.39 of 2025, which reads as under:-
“Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State. 2) The facts are not in dispute. Both the counsels are at ad idem regarding the facts. Both the counsels submit that in similar facts a Co-ordinate Bench of
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.