Kaushik Healthcare And General Supplies Goods vs. Commissioner State Goods And Service 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 agreement of both counsels that the facts of the present case were similar to those in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025. In that prior case, the Court had permitted the petitioner to apply for revocation of the cancellation order. The reasoning was that if the petitioner makes such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, and also furnishes all pending returns and deposits the unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the Competent Authority shall consider the prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the application. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of GST registration cancellation due to non-filing of returns, where the petitioner is similarly situated to previous successful petitioners and the revenue has no objection, the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to rectify the non-compliance and seek revocation.

Facts

The petitioner, Kaushik Healthcare and General Supplies Goods, is a taxable person registered under the GST Act, 2017. The Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3, cancelled the petitioner's GST registration on March 12, 2024. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the 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 counsels agreed that the facts are not in dispute and that the present case is similar to a previous writ petition, Writ Petition (S/B) 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 make an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, given their failure to furnish returns. This issue turns on the interpretation and application of the provisions of the GST Act, 2017, concerning registration cancellation and revocation. The petitioner argued that a similar order was passed in a previous case, Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, where the petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation and the authority was directed to consider it. The petitioner contended that a similar order should be passed in the present case. The respondents (Commissioner State Goods and Service Tax and another) stated they had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.