Kd Submersibile And Electricals vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate Dehradun

Facts

The petitioner, KD Submersible and Electricals, a sole proprietorship registered under the GST Act, 2017, had its GST registration cancelled by respondent no.2, the Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax, on 30.04.2024. The cancellation was based on a show cause notice dated 07.08.2023, which cited the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. The petitioner filed a Writ Petition challenging this cancellation order. The petitioner's counsel referred to a previous judgment where a similar petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation of cancellation, with directions to the authority to consider it.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by permitting the petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. The Court directed that if the petitioner files such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, and simultaneously 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 receiving the application. This decision was influenced by the petitioner's reliance on a prior judgment granting similar relief and the State's lack of objection.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, considering their failure to furnish returns. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that a similar relief was granted in a previous case (Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024) where the petitioner was allowed to make an application for revocation, and the authority was directed to consider it. They sought a similar order in the present case. Revenue's contention: The learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand stated that she had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.