Dinesh Verma vs. State Tax Officer State Tax Sector 6 Dehradun Uttarakhand

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the Respondent no. 1, State Tax Officer, State Tax, Sector – 6, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, ventilating his grievances within a period of 10 days. The Court directed that this application shall be considered by the Respondent no. 1 and a decision thereon shall be taken by a speaking and reasoned order after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. This decision is to be made within a period of 30 days from the production of a certified copy of the order along with the copy of the brief. The Court also noted the petitioner's undertaking to file the application within 10 days and added that if the petitioner pays any pending dues under the GST Act, his application for restoration of GST registration may be considered liberally. The Court did not expressly decide the validity of the Show Cause Notice or the Cancellation Order but provided a procedural remedy.

Facts

The petitioner, Dinesh Verma, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging a Show Cause Notice for Cancellation of Registration dated 29.10.2021 and an Order for Cancellation of Registration dated 11.11.2021, both issued by the State Tax Officer, State Tax, Dehradun (Respondent no. 1). The petitioner sought quashing of these notices and orders, and a direction for the revival of his GST registration. The petitioner argued that the issue was covered by a previous Division Bench judgment of the High Court 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 Show Cause Notice for Cancellation of Registration bearing Reference No. ZA051021051954W dated 29.10.2021 and the Order for Cancellation of Registration bearing Reference No. ZA0511210056918 dated 11.11.2021, both issued by the State Tax Officer, are liable to be quashed? (Question of law, relying on the principle that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issue is covered by a Division Bench judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court in SPA No. 123 of 2022 dated 20.06.2022, which held that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, and consequently, an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 would not lie to the Commissioner. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the respondents.