Suneel Kumar vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate
Held
The Court held that in view of the consensus between the parties that the matter is covered by the order passed in Writ Petition No. 931 of 2024, the present writ petition would also be decided in terms of that order. 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 the application, the petitioner was required to furnish all the GST returns that were not submitted and deposit the outstanding Goods and Service Tax dues. The competent authority was directed to consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within four weeks thereafter, provided the application was made within the stipulated time.
Facts
The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled by the respondent authority due to non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner attributed this to a communication gap with their tax consultant. The petitioner contended that this issue was identical to that decided in WPMS No. 931 of 2024 and other similar writ petitions, and sought a similar decision. The respondent's counsel did not dispute this and agreed that the present petition could be decided based on the order in WPMS No. 931 of 2024.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns for six consecutive months, where the petitioner attributes the non-filing to a communication gap with their tax consultant, warrants revocation under Section 30 of the Central GST Act, considering the precedent set in WPMS No. 931 of 2024 and similar cases? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that their case is identical to WPMS No. 931 of 2024 and other similar writ petitions, and therefore, the present petition should be decided in terms of the judgment dated 15.04.2024 in the aforementioned writ petition. Respondent's contention: The respondent's counsel did not dispute the petitioner's submission and fairly conceded that the writ petition could be decided in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 931 of 2024.
Sections Cited
Section 30
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No. 1573 of 2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Prince Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Shakshi Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the respondents.
GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground of non-filing of GST return for six consecutive months. The explanation offered by petitioner is that due to communication gap between him and tax consultant, engaged by petitioner, GST returns could not be filed in time.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identical issue has been decided by this Court in WPMS No. 931 of 2024 and many other similar writ petitions. Thus, he submits that the present writ petition may also be decided in terms of judgment dated 15.04.2024 rendered in the said writ petition.
This submission is not disputed by Ms. Shakshi Singh, learned counsel for the respondent, and she, in fact, fairly submits that the writ petition can be decided in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 931
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.