M/S La Sani Scaffolding Gstin vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition is decided in terms of the judgment rendered in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 501 of 2023, as there was a consensus between the parties on this point. The petitioner was granted liberty to file 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 must furnish all pending GST returns and deposit the outstanding tax and dues. The Competent Authority is 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, but the primary focus was on procedural rectifications based on the prior judgment.
Facts
The petitioner, a service provider registered under the Uttarakhand GST Act, is challenging the cancellation of its GST registration. The cancellation order, dated 27.01.2023, was issued solely on the ground of non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner's counsel argued that this issue has been decided by the High Court in a previous case, WPMS No. 501 of 2023, and other similar writ petitions. This contention was not disputed by the learned Brief Holder for the State. The parties agreed that the present writ petition is covered by the judgment in WPMS No. 501 of 2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months, without providing an opportunity to be heard or considering revocation, is legally sustainable under the relevant provisions of the GST Act? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the issue is squarely covered by the High Court's previous judgment in WPMS No. 501 of 2023, implying that the cancellation was premature or procedurally flawed. They relied on the principle that such matters are decided based on prior judicial pronouncements. Revenue/State's contention: The State did not dispute the petitioner's submission regarding the applicability of the previous judgment, indicating an agreement that the case is covered by the precedent. No specific arguments or reliance on provisions were recorded for the State.
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. 1169 of 2023
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Pooran Lal & Mr. Hemant Singh, Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is a service provider, which is registered under Uttarakhand GST Act. He is aggrieved by cancellation of his GST registration. The impugned cancellation order dated 27.01.2023 is on record as Annexure no. 1 to the writ petition. The sole ground for cancelling petitioner’s GST registration is non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that identical controversy has been decided by this Court in WPMS No. 501 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 judgment rendered in Writ Petition (M/S)
No. 501 of 2023, present writ p
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.