Mshimalyan Energy Solution vs. Assistant Commissioner
Held
The Court held that the matter was covered by the order passed in writ petition No. 75 of 2023 (M/S). The petitioner was granted liberty to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30 of the Central GST Act within two weeks. Along with this application, the petitioner was required to furnish all the GST returns that were not submitted and deposit the outstanding dues of Goods and Service Tax. The Court directed that if the application was made within the stipulated time, the competent authority shall consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within four weeks thereafter. No specific issue was expressly left undecided; the decision was based on the consensus and prior precedent.
Facts
The petitioner, registered under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act), had their GST registration cancelled by an order dated 13.07.2023. The reason for cancellation was the non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner's counsel submitted that a Coordinate Bench of the High Court had previously decided an identical controversy in WPMS No. 75 of 2023 and numerous other similar writ petitions. The learned Brief Holder for the State did not dispute this submission. Consequently, the present writ petition was decided in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 75 of 2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-submission of returns for six consecutive months is sustainable, considering prior High Court judgments on similar matters? (Question of law) The petitioner argued that an identical controversy had been decided by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court in WPMS No. 75 of 2023 and many other similar writ petitions. This implies the petitioner contended that the cancellation was not in line with established High Court precedent and should be set aside or reconsidered based on those decisions. The revenue (State) did not dispute the petitioner's submission regarding the existence of similar prior judgments. Therefore, the revenue did not present any counter-argument against the petitioner's reliance on the previous High Court orders.
Sections Cited
Section 30
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Sl. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No. 1478 of 2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Pankaj Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
Petitioner was registered under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act). His registration has been cancelled by order dated 13.07.2023 for non submission of GST returns for six consecutive months.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that identical controversy has been decided by Coordinate Bench of this Court in WPMS No. 75 of 2023 and many other similar writ petitions.
This submission is not disputed by Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State.
In view of consensus between the parties that matter is covered by the order passed in writ petition No.75 of 2023 (M/S), present writ petition is also decided in terms of the said order. Petitioner shall be at liberty to move an application for revocation of cancellation order under Section 30 of Central GST Act within two weeks. With his
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.