M/S Shubham Sharma vs. Commissioner Uttarakhand State GST Commissionerate

Held

The Court held that the present writ petition should be disposed of on similar terms as Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025, disposed of on February 24, 2025. The Court permitted the petitioner to move an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order. The Competent Authority was directed to consider the petitioner's prayer for revocation as per law, provided the petitioner makes such an application within two weeks from the date of the order. Additionally, the petitioner was required to furnish all pending returns and deposit unpaid tax along with interest and penalty. The Competent Authority was to pass an appropriate order within four weeks from the receipt of the application. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of GST registration cancellation due to non-filing of returns, a procedural fairness can be extended by allowing the taxpayer an opportunity to rectify the default and seek revocation, provided they comply with the stipulated conditions.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Shubham Sharma, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging the cancellation of its 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 a prescribed period. The petitioner argued that the issue was similar to those decided in previous writ petitions (M/B) No. 39 of 2025 and (M/B) No. 79 of 2025. The respondents, represented by the Commissioner Uttarakhand State GST Commissionerate and others, did not object to the petitioner's request for relief.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to apply for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, considering the precedent set in similar cases before this Court? 2. Whether the Competent Authority should be directed to consider the petitioner's application for revocation of cancellation as per law? The petitioner argued that a similar order was passed in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, where the petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation, and the Competent Authority was directed to consider it. The petitioner sought a similar disposition for the present case. The respondents, through the learned Brief Holder, submitted that they had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.