Bachinagar Kishan Sewa Sahkari Samiti vs. Assistant Commissioner State Tax
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an application before Respondent No. 1, the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector – 3, Haldwani, Uttarakhand. The Court directed that if the petitioner pays any outstanding dues under the GST Act, their application for restoration of GST registration should be considered liberally. The Court's decision was based on the precedent set by the Division Bench judgment in SPA No. 123 of 2022, which established that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, implying that the procedural route of appeal to the Commissioner under Section 107 might not be the appropriate recourse for the petitioner's grievances regarding the cancellation of registration. The Court did not explicitly decide on the validity of the show cause notice or the cancellation order themselves but provided a path for resolution.
Facts
The petitioner, seeking to quash a show cause notice for cancellation of GST registration (Reference No. ZA0502222000620J dated 01.02.2022) and the subsequent order for cancellation of registration (Reference No. ZA0503220015860 dated 03.03.2022), both issued by Respondent No. 1, approached the High Court via a writ petition. The petitioner also prayed for a direction to revive their GST registration. The procedural history involves the issuance of these notices and orders by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Commissioner is an adjudicating authority under the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, and consequently, whether an appeal under Section 107 of the Act lies to the Commissioner? The petitioner argued that the issue is covered by a Division Bench judgment of the 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. The revenue or State's contentions are not recorded 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. 2764 of 2022
Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
Mr. Rohit Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Maulekhi and Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State. 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 impugned Show Cause Notice for cancellation of Registration bearing Reference No. ZA0502222000620J dated 01.02.2022 issued by the Respondent no. 1. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order for cancellation of Registration bearing Reference No. ZA0503220015860 dated 03.03.2022 issued by the respondent no. 1. iii. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent to revive the GST Registration of the petitioner. iv. Issue any other writ, order or direction and/or allow any other consequential relief as expedient in law, on the facts and circumstances of the case.
It is subm
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.