Kamlesh Rawat Gstin vs. Commissioner State Goods And Service Tax Commissionerate Dehradun
Held
The Court held that the matter was covered by a previous order of a Coordinate Bench in WPMS No. 75 of 2023. The Court directed that the petitioner be at 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 must furnish all pending GST returns and deposit the outstanding tax and dues. Upon receiving such an application within the stipulated time, the Competent Authority is directed to consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law within four weeks thereafter. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, a civil contractor registered under the CGST Act, had their GST registration cancelled by an order dated 11.11.2022 due to non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner sought to quash this cancellation order and sought a direction to permit them to file an application for revocation of the cancellation under Section 30 of the UK GST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner expressed readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. The petitioner's counsel submitted that a Coordinate Bench of the High Court had decided an identical controversy in WPMS No. 75 of 2023 and other similar writ petitions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-submission of returns for six consecutive months, without considering the petitioner's willingness to deposit outstanding dues and file pending returns, is legally sustainable under the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the cancellation order should be quashed as they are prepared to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. They relied on a decision by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court in WPMS No. 75 of 2023, which dealt with a similar controversy. Revenue's Contention: The learned Brief Holder for the State did not dispute the petitioner's submission regarding the applicability of the order in WPMS No. 75 of 2023.
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. 885 of 2023 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
Petitioner is a civil contractor who was registered under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act). His registration has been cancelled by order dated 11.11.2022 for non- submission of GST returns for six consecutive months.
The reliefs sought in the writ petition are as follows:- (i) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the record of the case and quash the cancellation of GST Registration order dated 11.11.2022 (Annexure No. 3 to W.P.) as petitioner is ready to pay all the balance tax, interest on it and late fee if any.
(ii) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus permitting the petitioner to prefer an application U/S 30 of the UK GST/CGST Act, 2017, for filing an application for revocation of the cancellation of the GSTIN (05ALMPR58
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.