Ankit Jain vs. State Tax Officer
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition should be disposed of in terms of the relief granted in a previous order of the Court dated February 24, 2025, in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39/2025. This order permitted the petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. Specifically, if the petitioner filed 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 was directed to consider the prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks of receiving the application. The Court found no reason to deviate from this established precedent and applied it to the current case.
Facts
The petitioner, Ankit Jain, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court 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 show cause notice issued on February 23, 2024, indicated this reason for cancellation. The present writ petition, No. 911 of 2025, was filed by the petitioner. Both parties agreed that the issue was covered by a previous order of the same court dated February 24, 2025, in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39/2025.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to apply for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, considering the circumstances of non-furnishing of returns. (Question of law and fact, concerning the provisions related to GST registration cancellation and revocation). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that a similar relief granted in a previous writ petition (Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024) should be extended to him. This relief involved permitting the petitioner to apply for revocation of the cancellation order, with a direction to the Competent Authority to consider it as per law. Respondent's contention: The State Tax Officer (respondent) submitted that they had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 140
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT : (per Sri G. Narendar, C.J.)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
Both counsels submit that the issue raised in the present Writ Petition is covered by an order of this Court dated 24.02.2025, rendered in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39/2025. The order disposing of Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025 is placed before this Court, and the same reads as under: “Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand through video conferencing.
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.