Jai Mata Di Construction Gstin vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax Commissionerate

Facts

The petitioner, Jai Mata Di Construction, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of its GST registration by the Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3, vide an order dated 12.03.2024. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period, as indicated in a show cause notice dated 23.02.2024. The petitioner sought a similar relief as granted in a previous writ petition (Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024), where the court allowed the petitioner to apply for revocation of the cancellation order and directed the authority to consider it. The respondents, represented by the learned Brief Holder, had no objection to this course of action. The present writ petition was disposed of in terms of a prior judgment dated 17.03.2025, which itself followed an order in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 17.03.2025, which was rendered following the order in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. The Court noted that both counsels were at 'ad idem' regarding the facts and agreed that the instant petitioner was similarly situated as the petitioner in the aforementioned writ petition. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition on similar terms as granted in paragraph 8 of the order dated 24.02.2025, passed in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. This meant the petitioner was permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order within two weeks from the date of the order. If the petitioner furnished all pending returns, deposited unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the Competent Authority was directed to consider the prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the application. The Court did not explicitly decide on the merits of the cancellation itself but provided a procedural remedy.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, Jai Mata Di Construction, should be permitted to apply for revocation of its GST registration cancellation, similar to the relief granted in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024? 2. Whether the Competent Authority should be directed to consider the petitioner's application for revocation of cancellation as per law within a specified timeframe? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that its case was similar to that in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, and therefore, it should be allowed to make an application for revocation of the cancellation order. The petitioner relied on the judgment in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, which permitted such an application and directed the Competent Authority to consider it. The petitioner sought a similar order. Respondents' Contention: The learned Brief Holder for the State submitted 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 present any arguments against the petitioner's request.