Irshad Ahamad Contractor Gstin vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax
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. 75 of 2023, the present writ petition is also decided in terms of the said order. The petitioner is 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 must furnish all the GST returns that were not submitted and deposit the outstanding tax and dues. The Competent Authority shall consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within four weeks of receiving the application, provided it is made within the stipulated time. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Facts
The petitioner is aggrieved by the cancellation of his GST registration, an order dated 16/11/2022. The cancellation was based on the allegation that the petitioner had not filed GST returns for a continuous period of six months. The petitioner sought quashing of the cancellation order and a direction to permit him to file an application for revocation of cancellation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner stated that the lapse in filing returns was due to unavoidable circumstances and expressed readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. The petitioner also cited a coordinate bench's decision in a similar case, WPMS No. 75 of 2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns for six months, without considering the petitioner's willingness to regularize dues, is legally sustainable, turning on Section 29(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 21 of the CGST Rules, 2017. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the lapse in filing GST returns was due to unavoidable circumstances and that he is prepared to submit all pending returns and deposit the outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. He relied on a coordinate bench's decision in WPMS No. 75 of 2023, which dealt with a similar controversy. Revenue's Arguments: 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 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. 698 of 2023
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
Petitioner is aggrieved by cancellation of his GST registration. The cancellation order is on record as Annexure No.
Before passing the cancellation order, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner, wherein, it was alleged that petitioner has not filed GST returns for a continuous period of six months. On this very ground, the petitioner’s GST registration has been cancelled.
The reliefs sought in the writ petition are as follows:- (i) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari calling there cord of the case and quash the cancellation of GSTR registration order dated 16/11/2022 (Annexure No. 2 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 m
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.