Sajal Kumar Dutta vs. State Tax Officer
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 CGST Act within two weeks from the date of the order. Along with the application, the petitioner was required to furnish all the GST returns that were previously not submitted and deposit any outstanding tax and dues. The Competent Authority was directed to consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within four weeks of receiving the application, provided it was made within the stipulated time.
Facts
The petitioner, engaged in retail business, had their GST registration cancelled by an order dated 03.05.2023. The cancellation was due to 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 other similar writ petitions. This submission was not disputed by the learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 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, without affording an opportunity of hearing, is valid under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act)? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the cancellation of registration was based on a previous order concerning an identical controversy decided by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court in WPMS No. 75 of 2023 and other similar writ petitions. They relied on the principle that similar matters should be decided consistently. Revenue's contention: The learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand did not dispute the petitioner's submission regarding the existence of a prior binding precedent on an identical issue. Therefore, no specific arguments were advanced by the revenue against the petitioner's claim.
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.1404 of 2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. (1) Mr. Rohit Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2) Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
(3) Petitioner is engaged in retail business who was registered under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act). His registration has been cancelled by order dated 03.05.2023 for non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months.
(4) 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.
(5) This submission is not disputed by Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State.
(6) 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
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.