Rishikesh Builders A Partnership Firm Incorporated vs. Teh State Of Uttarakhand
Held
The Court noted the petitioner's submission that the issue was covered by a previous Division Bench judgment of the High Court. This judgment had held that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, and therefore, an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, would not lie to the Commissioner. Based on this, the Court disposed of the writ petition. It granted liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the Assistant Commissioner, State Goods & Services Tax, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, to ventilate their grievances. The Court directed that if the petitioner pays all pending dues under the GST Act, their application for restoration of GST registration may be considered liberally. Furthermore, the petitioner was directed to file the returns for the six months prior to the cancellation order, along with monthly returns from 11.11.2021 until the filing of their representation.
Facts
The petitioner, a registered person under the GST Act, filed a writ petition seeking to quash the Cancellation Order (GST – REG – 19) dated 11.11.2021, which cancelled their GST registration. The petitioner also sought a direction to revive their registration, stating that its cancellation jeopardized their business and impaired their constitutional rights. The petitioner argued that the issue was covered by a previous Division Bench judgment of the same High Court in SPA No. 123 of 2022, which held that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority and therefore, an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, would not lie to the Commissioner.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration vide the order dated 11.11.2021 is liable to be quashed? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the revival of their GST registration? The petitioner contended that the issue of the Commissioner not being an adjudicating authority, and consequently, an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, not lying to the Commissioner, was settled by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in SPA No. 123 of 2022. The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 107
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 JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS No. 3370 of 2022
Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
Mr. Sahil Mullick, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Tarun Lakhera the learned Brief Holder for the respondents. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed as follows:- i. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Cancellation Order (GST – REG – 19) dated 11.11.2021 (Annexure No. 1).
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to revive the GST registration of the petitioner; in as much as, the business affairs of the petitioner are jeopardized and seriously impairing the Constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioner; iii. Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the present case.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in SPA No. 123 of 2022 on 20.06.2022 where
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.