Mohammad Ayaz Parray And Ors. vs. Union Territory Of J And K And Ors. (Goods And Service Taxes)
Held
The High Court disposed of the writ petition based on the peculiar facts and circumstances and in analogy with similar cases previously decided by the Court. The Court directed the petitioner to approach the Competent Authority for the registration of their GST number within seven days. The Competent Authority was instructed to restore the petitioner's GST number immediately, subject to the completion of all requisite formalities. The petitioner was also directed to file returns and deposit all taxes, penalty, and interest within seven days. The order stated that it would cease to operate if the petitioner failed to comply within the stipulated period. The Court explicitly noted that it had not gone into the legal issue of maintainability raised by the respondents and that the order should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the direct maintainability of a petition under Article 226 when an alternative remedy of appeal is available.
Facts
The petitioner, Mohammad Ayaz Parrray and Ors., had their GST registration cancelled by the Sales Tax Officer, Circle Baramulla-II, Kashmir, effective October 31, 2022, following a show cause notice and their reply. Aggrieved, the petitioner appealed to the Appellate Authority, State Taxes, Appeals-II Kashmir Division, Srinagar. However, this appeal was dismissed on April 25, 2024, as being barred by limitation. Consequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar, seeking restoration of their GST registration.
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, particularly when the appeal was dismissed on limitation grounds? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking restoration of their GST registration. The judgment does not explicitly record the petitioner's arguments on maintainability but implies they sought relief from the High Court. Respondent's contention: The learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the respondents raised a legal issue regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, especially given the dismissal of the appeal on limitation. However, the Court did not delve into this legal issue.
Sections Cited
Section 107(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDE R 28.05.2025 WP(C) 645/2025
Pursuant to a show cause notice dated 10th August, 2022, reply was submitted by the petitioner on 10th September, 2022. The Sales Tax Officer, Circle Baramulla-II, Kashmir, considered the reply and vide order dated 31st October, 2022, cancelled the registration of the petitioner w.e.f. 31st October, 2022. 2. Aggrieved of the cancellation of registration, 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. The appeal came to be dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 25th April, 2024, on the ground that the same was barred by limitation. This
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.