M/S Gaurav Enterprises vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was covered by a previous order of the Court in WPMS No. 501 of 2023 and other similar writ petitions. The petitioner was 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 was directed to furnish all pending GST returns and deposit the 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. The Court disposed of the writ petition with these directions.
Facts
The petitioner is aggrieved by the cancellation of their GST registration, vide an order dated 19.08.2021. The sole reason cited for the cancellation was the non-submission of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner attributed this lapse to their GST consultant. The petitioner's counsel submitted that a similar issue was decided by this Court in WPMS No. 501 of 2023 and other connected writ petitions. This submission was not disputed by the learned Brief Holder for the State. Consequently, the parties agreed that the present writ petition could be decided in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 501 of 2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration solely on the ground of non-submission of returns for six consecutive months, without considering the explanation offered by the petitioner, is legally sustainable, turning on the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Central GST Act and Rules concerning cancellation of registration and revocation. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the cancellation was based on a procedural lapse attributable to their consultant and that identical controversies had been decided by the Court in previous writ petitions, implying that a more lenient approach or opportunity to rectify the default should be granted. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the learned Brief Holder, did not dispute the petitioner's submission regarding the existence of prior judgments on identical issues, thereby implicitly agreeing that the matter was covered by previous decisions.
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. 637 of 2023 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Tarun Pande, learned counsel 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 19.08.2021 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.
The explanation offered by the petitioner is due to lapse on the part of the GST consultant hired by the petitioner, return could not be filed.
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), presen
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.