M/S Ayush Construction Co. vs. Commissioner , State Goods And Services Tax
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Ayush Construction Co., 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, vide an order dated 12.03.2024. The reason for cancellation, as indicated in the show cause notice dated 23.02.2024, was the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. Both parties agreed that the facts were not in dispute and that the case was similar to a previously decided writ petition (Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025).
Held
The Court held that the writ petition should be disposed of on similar terms as the order passed in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. This meant that the petitioner 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, and simultaneously furnished all pending returns, and deposited the unpaid tax along with applicable 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 noted that both counsels were in agreement on the facts and the proposed course of action.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, given the circumstances of non-filing of returns. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that a similar order should be passed in their case as was done in a previous writ petition (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 also relied on the precedent set in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. Respondents' 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.
Sections Cited
Section 29
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2025:UHC:4335-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA
WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 297 OF 2025
23RD MAY, 2025
M/s Ayush Construction Co.
…… Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax & others
…… Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, learned counsel
Counsel for the respondents : Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State / respondents
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar)
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State. 2) The facts are not in dispute. Both the counsels are at ad idem regarding the facts. Both the counsels submit that in similar facts a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while disposing of Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025 1
2025:UHC:4335-DB dated 24.02.2025 (which was also later on followed in WPMB No. 80 of 2025), was pleased to hold and order as follows : “Ms. Prab
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.