M/S Maa Parwati Enterprises vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Maa Parwati Enterprises, 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 present 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.

Held

The Court held that the instant writ petition should be disposed of on similar terms as Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025. 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 applicable interest and penalty, the Competent Authority shall 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's decision was based on the agreement of both counsels and the precedent set by a Co-ordinate Bench in a similar matter.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to make an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, given the circumstances leading to the cancellation. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that a similar order should be passed in its case as was done in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, where the petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation, and the Competent Authority was directed to consider the application. The petitioner relied on this precedent. 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.