M/S Rajesh Kumar Contractor vs. Commissioner Uttarakhand State G S T Commissionerate Dehradun
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the Assistant Commissioner, State GST. The Court directed that if the petitioner pays all pending dues under the GST Act, his application for the restoration of GST registration should be considered liberally. The Court's reasoning was based on the petitioner's counsel's submission that the matter was covered by a previous Division Bench judgment holding that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, implying that the appeal mechanism under Section 107 might not have been appropriately invoked or that the petitioner sought a different route for resolution. The operative direction is to consider the petitioner's application for restoration upon payment of dues.
Facts
The petitioner, Mr. Ashutosh Posti, filed a writ petition seeking to quash the cancellation of his GST registration, which was ordered on August 17, 2021. The petitioner stated his readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. The petitioner's counsel argued that the issue was covered by a previous Division Bench judgment of the High Court in SPA No. 123 of 2022. This judgment 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 order dated 17.08.2021 is liable to be quashed, considering the petitioner's willingness to clear all pending dues (tax, interest, and late fees). Contentions: Petitioner: The petitioner argued that the issue is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in SPA No. 123 of 2022, which established that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority. Consequently, an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017, to the Commissioner is not maintainable. Revenue/State: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents.
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 JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No. 2191 of 2022
Hon’ble S.K. Mishra, J.
Mr. Ashutosh Posti, the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, the learned Brief Holder for the respondents.
By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed as follows:-
i. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the record of the case and quash the cancellation of GST Registration order dated 17.08.2021 (Annexure no. 3 to the writ petition) as petitioner is ready to pay all the balance tax, interest on it and late fee if any.
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 wherein this Court has held that the Commissioner is not an adjudicating authority, and, therefore, appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 shall not lie to the Commissioner.
In that view of the matter, we dispose of the writ petition giving liberty to
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.