Saar Biofuels vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax

Held

The Court held that the petitioner should be permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. This decision was based on the consensus between the petitioner and the revenue, and importantly, on the precedent set by a Co-ordinate Bench in Writ Petition No. 39 of 2025. The Court directed that if the petitioner files such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, and simultaneously furnishes all pending returns and deposits the unpaid tax along with applicable interest and penalty, the Competent Authority shall consider the prayer for revocation in accordance with the law within four weeks of receiving the application. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of GST registration cancellation due to non-filing of returns, a path for revocation should be provided if the taxpayer rectifies the non-compliance by filing returns and paying dues, mirroring previous judicial pronouncements.

Facts

The petitioner, Saar Biofuels, 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 March 12, 2024. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for a prescribed period, as indicated in a show cause notice issued on February 23, 2024. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging this cancellation order. Both parties agreed that the facts are not in dispute and that the present case is similar to a previous writ petition, Writ Petition No. 39 of 2025, disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench on February 24, 2025.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to apply for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, considering their failure to furnish returns, as per the principles laid down in similar cases. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that a similar order should be passed in their case, allowing them to apply for revocation of the cancellation order, referencing a judgment by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024. This judgment permitted the petitioner therein to apply for revocation and directed the Competent Authority to consider it. Revenue's Argument: The learned Brief Holder for the State submitted that they have no objection if the petitioner is permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.