M/S Ankita Construction vs. State Of Uttarakhand
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Ankita Construction, is a taxable person registered under the GST Act, 2017. Their GST registration was cancelled 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 the show cause notice issued on 23.02.2024. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging this cancellation order. Both counsels agreed that the facts are not in dispute and are similar to a previous case.
Held
The Court, noting that the facts were not in dispute and were similar to a Co-ordinate Bench's decision in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025 dated 24.02.2025, disposed of the present writ petition on similar terms. The Court permitted the petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. This permission is conditional: the petitioner must file the application within two weeks from the date of the order, furnish all pending returns, and deposit the unpaid tax along with applicable interest and penalty. Upon fulfillment of these conditions, 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. The reasoning is based on the precedent set by the Co-ordinate Bench and the agreement of both counsels.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to make an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, given their failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. The petitioner argued that a similar order should be passed in their case as was done in a previous writ petition (Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024), where the petitioner was allowed to apply for revocation and the authority was directed to consider it. The petitioner relied on this precedent. The respondents (State of Uttarakhand & others), represented by the learned Brief Holder, stated they 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
2025:UHC:1824-DB 1
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. 79 OF 2025
17TH MARCH, 2025
M/s Ankita Construction
…… Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others
…… Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Tarun Pande, 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 while disposing of Writ Petition (S/B) No. 39 of 2025
2025:UHC:1824-DB 2 dated 24.02.2025, was pleased to hold and order as follows : “Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Hol
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.