Ms Maa Bhagwati Traders vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate
Held
The Court held that in view of the consensus between the parties and the fact that the matter was covered by the order in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024, the writ petition could be disposed of accordingly. The petitioner was granted liberty to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, within two weeks. Along with this application, the petitioner was directed to furnish all pending GST returns and deposit all outstanding dues, including tax, interest, penalty, and late fees. The Competent Authority was then directed to consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within four weeks thereafter. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Maa Bhagwati Traders, a proprietorship firm registered under the CGST Act, 2017, challenged an order dated 07.12.2018 by Respondent No. 2 cancelling its GST registration. The cancellation was due to non-filing of GST returns for a continuous period of six months. The petitioner stated readiness to pay outstanding GST dues, penalties, interest, and late fees for the period of default. The petitioner also relied on a previous order of this Court in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024 concerning an identical controversy. The respondents did not oppose this submission.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application under Section 30 of the UKGST/GST Act, 2017, for revocation of the cancellation of its GST registration? 2. Whether the Competent Authority should be directed to consider the petitioner's application for revocation in accordance with law? Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that it is now prepared to clear all outstanding GST dues, including penalties, interest, and late fees for the six-month period of non-filing. They further contended that an identical issue was decided by this Court in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024, and therefore, the present petition should be decided in terms of that order. Respondents' contentions: The respondents did not oppose the petitioner's submissions regarding the applicability of the order in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024.
Sections Cited
Section 30, Section 30(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024:UHC:7556 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 2794 of 2024
Ms Maa Bhagwati Traders
--Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate and Another
--Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:-
Mr. Pooran Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel with Ms. Sakshi Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the cancellation of GST Registration order dated 07.12.2018 and further prayed for permitting him to prefer an application under Section 30 of the UKGST/GST Act 2017, for revocation of the cancellation of 05GIJPS0152N1ZV of the petitioner and further a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the application of the petitioner in accordance with law.
Petitioner is a proprietorship firm who runs a business under the name and style of ‘M/s Maa Bhagwati Traders’. Petitioner is registered under the Central Goods and Service T
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.