M/S Heritage Agro Industry vs. Union Territory Of J And K And Others (State Taxes Department)
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to approach the Competent Authority for the restoration of its GST registration within ten days. The Competent Authority was directed to restore the registration immediately, subject to the petitioner completing all requisite formalities. The petitioner was also directed to file returns and deposit all taxes, penalty, and interest within ten days. The order stated that if the petitioner failed to comply within the stipulated period, the order would cease to be operational. The Court explicitly noted that it had not gone into the legal issue raised by the respondents regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, nor did it express any opinion on the maintainability of a petition under Article 226 notwithstanding the availability of an alternative remedy. The decision was based on the peculiar facts and circumstances and analogy with previously decided cases.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Heritage Agro Industry, is aggrieved by an order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the State Tax Officer, Circle Pulwama, cancelling its GST registration. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, State Taxes, Appeals-II Kashmir Division, Srinagar, which was rejected on 11.11.2025, being barred by limitation. Consequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking restoration of its GST registration. The respondents are the Union Territory of J&K and others.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable despite the availability of an alternative remedy of appeal, given that the appeal was rejected on grounds of limitation? The petitioner argued for the restoration of registration, relying on previous orders of the High Court where similar directions were issued subject to compliance with tax and penalty obligations. The respondents, through the Sr. AAG, raised a legal issue regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, but the Court did not delve into this. The Court noted that similar cases were disposed of based on the petitioner's undertaking to deposit tax, penalty, and interest, and on the concession of the respondents to restore registration for defaulting dealers who comply with the law. Precedents cited include orders in WP(C) 873/2024, WP(C) 182/2024, and WP(C) 1350/2025.
Sections Cited
Section 107(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 03.04.2026
The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the State Tax Officer, Circle Pulwama for cancellation of his GST registration certificate. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 107(1) of the GST Act, 2017, before the Appellate Authority State Taxes, Appeals-II Kashmir Division, Srinagar, however, the said appeal came to be rejected by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 11.11.2025, on the ground that the same was barred by limitation. The petitioner has now invoked the Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking inter alia a direction to the respondents to restore his registration cancelled in terms of the order dated 14.09.2023. 02. Similar cases have come up
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 High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.