Devendra Singh Dhauni vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the relief granted in a previous judgment dated February 24, 2025, in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. The petitioner was permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order within two weeks from the date of the order. If the petitioner filed such an application and also furnished all pending returns and deposited the unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the Competent Authority was directed to consider the petitioner's prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the application. The Court noted the submission of both counsels and ordered accordingly, with no order as to costs.

Facts

The petitioner, Devendra Singh Dhauni, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging the cancellation of his GST registration. The cancellation order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3, on March 12, 2024. The reason for cancellation, as indicated in the show cause notice dated February 23, 2024, was the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. The petitioner sought a similar relief as granted in a previous writ petition (W.P. (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024), where the petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation of the cancellation order. The respondents, represented by the Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax, had no objection to this course of action.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application for revocation of the cancellation of his GST registration, and if so, under what conditions and timeline? This issue turns on the interpretation and application of the provisions governing the cancellation and revocation of GST registration under the GST Act, 2017, and relevant administrative practices. The petitioner argued that a similar relief was granted in a previous case and sought a comparable order. The respondents, through their learned Brief Holder, stated they had no objection to the petitioner being permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.