Ashok Manori vs. Assistant Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, Ashok Manori, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of his GST registration by the Assistant Commissioner, Roorkee Sector -1. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. The facts were not in dispute between the petitioner and the respondents. Both parties agreed that the case was similar to a previous writ petition, Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025, decided by a Co-ordinate Bench of the same High Court on 24.02.2025, which was also followed in WPMB No. 80 of 2025. The petitioner sought a similar disposal order.
Held
The Court held that since both counsels were at ad idem regarding the facts and submissions, and the instant petitioner was similarly situated as the petitioner in the previously decided Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025, the present writ petition should be disposed of on similar terms. The Court permitted the petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If the petitioner files such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, 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 Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application for revocation of the cancellation of his GST registration, considering his failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that a similar order should be passed in his case as was done in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025, where the petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation of cancellation and the authority was directed to consider it. The petitioner relied on the precedent set by the Co-ordinate Bench. Revenue/State's 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
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2025:UHC:3724-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. 217 OF 2025
09TH MAY, 2025
Ashok Manori
…… Petitioner
Versus
Assistant Commissioner, Roorkee Sector -1, State Goods and Services Tax & another
…… Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Sagar Kothari, 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 1
2025:UHC:3724-DB while disposing of Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025 dated 24.02.2025 (which was also later on followed in WPMB No. 80 of 2025), was pleased to hold and order as fol
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.