Shivam Bisht vs. Assistant Commissioner Sector 4 Haldwani
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition is to be decided in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 501 of 2023, given the consensus between the parties. 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 submit all pending GST returns and deposit any outstanding tax and dues. The Competent Authority is directed to consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law within four weeks of receiving it. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions. No specific issue was expressly left undecided, but the substantive validity of the cancellation order itself was not directly adjudicated, rather the path to rectification was provided.
Facts
The petitioner is aggrieved by the cancellation of their GST registration, as per an order dated 12.05.2022. The sole reason cited for the cancellation was the non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner's counsel argued that this situation is identical to a previous case, WPMS No. 501 of 2023, and several other similar writ petitions decided by this Court. The counsel for the State did not dispute this submission. Consequently, the Court agreed to decide the present writ petition in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 501 of 2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-submission of returns for six consecutive months is justified, considering the petitioner's claim that the matter is covered by previous High Court orders? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017 and relevant rules). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the issue is identical to WPMS No. 501 of 2023 and other similar writ petitions, implying that the Court's previous decision should govern this case. They relied on the principle of consistency in judicial pronouncements. Revenue's contention: The State's counsel did not dispute the petitioner's submission regarding the applicability of the previous order, indicating an agreement that the matter was covered by precedent.
Sections Cited
Section 29, 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. 850 of 2023 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Ashish Agrawal, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Akshay Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
Petitioner is aggrieved by cancellation of his GST registration. The impugned cancellation order dated 12.05.2022 is on record as Annexure no. 2 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 order passed in Writ Petition No. 501 of 2023 (M/S), present writ petition is also decided in terms of the said order.
Petitioner shall be at liberty to move an app
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.