Arvind vs. The Commissioner SGST
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Arvind, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging the cancellation of his 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. The show cause notice was issued on 23.02.2024. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment of a Single Judge in a similar case where the petitioner was permitted to apply for revocation of cancellation. The State, through its counsel, had no objection to a similar order being passed in the present case. Both counsels agreed that the facts were not in dispute and that the present petition was similarly situated to the earlier one.
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition should be disposed of on similar terms as the order passed in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025 dated 24.02.2025. This means the petitioner is permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If the petitioner makes such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, and simultaneously furnishes all pending returns, deposits the unpaid tax along with applicable interest and penalty, the Competent Authority is directed to 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 regarding the facts and the desired course of action.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to make 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 by a Co-ordinate Bench in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025 dated 24.02.2025, which allowed the petitioner in that case to apply for revocation. The petitioner relied on a judgment by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, which permitted a similar course of action. Revenue'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
GST Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT : (per Mr. G. Narendar C. J.)
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State.
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 (S/B) No. 39 of 2025 dated 24.02.2025, was pleased to hold and order
2025:UHC:3635-DB
2 as follows:- “Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand through video conferencing.
Petitioner is a taxable person, registered under GST Act, 2017. His GST registration has been cancelled by Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3 vide order dated 12.03.2024. Challenging the cancellation order, petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
The show cause notice issued to the petitioner on 23.02.2024 reveals that cancellation has been ordered on account of petitioner’s failure to furnish GST returns for prescribed period.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a judgment rendered by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, whereby, petitioner in that case was permitted to make application for revocation of the cancellation order and the Competent Authority was directed to consider the application and pass appropriate order as per law, within four weeks thereafter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a similar order be passed in the present case also.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder submits that she has no objection if petitioner is permitted to move appropriate application for revocation of cancellation order.
Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of by permitting petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If he makes such application within two weeks from today and also furnishes all the pending returns and deposits unpaid tax along with interest and amount of penalty, the Competent Authority shall consider the petitioner’s prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of such application.”
Both the counsels submit that the instant petitioner also being similarly situated as the petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition, the instant writ petition also be disposed of on similar terms.
Submissions of both counsels are placed on record.
2025:UHC:3635-DB
3
Writ petition is disposed off on the above terms as in Para 8 of the order dated 24.02.2025. (G. NARENDAR, C. J.)
(ALOK MAHRA, J.) Dated: 08.05.2025 BS BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe2eacbf28cdf4ba7ce8640 c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE5185F418755DC00A7A13 C14A680C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2025.05.13 17:49:31 +05'30'
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.