Jayendra Singh vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate

Held

The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the relief granted in paragraph 8 of the judgment dated February 24, 2025, rendered in Writ Petition (M/B) No.39 of 2025. This order permitted the petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation of his GST registration. The condition was that if the petitioner made such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, furnished all pending returns, and deposited the unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the Competent Authority would consider the prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the receipt of the application. The Court accepted the submissions of both counsels and disposed of the writ petition on these terms. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Jayendra Singh, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Uttarakhand challenging the cancellation of his GST registration. The cancellation was ordered by the Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3, on March 12, 2024, due to 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 (Writ Petition (M/B) No.39 of 2025). The respondents, represented by the Commissioner, State Goods & Service Tax Commissionerate, Dehradun, did not object to this course of action. The court was informed that the present petition could be disposed of in terms of a prior judgment dated March 17, 2025, which itself followed the order in Writ Petition (M/B) No.39 of 2025.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to apply for revocation of the cancellation of his GST registration, considering his failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that he is a taxable person registered under the GST Act, 2017, and his registration was cancelled due to non-furnishing of returns. He relied on a previous judgment by a Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, where the petitioner was allowed to make an application for revocation of cancellation, and the Competent Authority was directed to consider it. The petitioner sought a similar order. Revenue's Contention: The learned Brief Holder for the State submitted that she had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.