Tiwari Enterprises vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition on the same terms as the order dated 24.02.2025 passed in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025. This meant that the petitioner, Tiwari Enterprises, was permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. The Court directed that 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 would consider the petitioner's prayer for revocation in accordance with the law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the application. The Court did not explicitly address the specific provisions of the GST Act beyond the reference to Section 30 for revocation, nor did it delve into the merits of the cancellation order itself, focusing instead on procedural relief.

Facts

The petitioner, Tiwari Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of its GST registration order dated 16.12.2022, passed by the respondent authorities. The petitioner expressed readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. Both the petitioner and the respondents agreed that the present petition could be disposed of in terms of a previous order dated 16.06.2025, passed in Writ Petition No. 372 of 2025. This previous order, in turn, referred to and followed an order dated 24.02.2025, passed in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025. In that earlier case, the cancellation of GST registration was due to the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, Tiwari Enterprises, should be permitted to file an application for revocation of the cancellation of its GST registration, given its willingness to clear all dues? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that its GST registration was cancelled and prayed for a writ of certiorari to quash the cancellation order, stating its readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. It also sought a writ of mandamus to permit it to file an application for revocation of cancellation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017, and for the respondent to consider it. The petitioner relied on a Single Judge's order in a similar case (Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024) where the petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation. Respondents' Argument: The learned Brief Holder for the State/respondents stated that they had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order. The respondents did not rely on any specific provisions, circulars, or precedents.