R.P.G. International Through Its Proprietor Smt. Savita Garg vs. Sales Tax Officer Class Ii/Avato, Ward-71, Department Of Trade And Taxes, Vyapar Bhawan, I.P. Estat

Facts

The petitioner, R.P.G. International, through its proprietor Smt. Savita Garg, challenged an order dated 25.08.2021, which retrospectively cancelled its GST registration from 01.07.2017. This order was passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward-71, Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCTD. The petitioner filed an appeal against this order on 15.12.2025, bearing reference no. AD071222005039L. The petitioner's counsel stated that at this juncture, they were satisfied with a direction for the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal expeditiously. The High Court made it clear that it had not dealt with the merits of the case.

Held

The Court directed the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of the order. The Court explicitly stated that it had not dealt with the merits of the case. The reasoning behind the direction for expeditious disposal is to provide a timely resolution to the petitioner's grievance concerning the retrospective cancellation of its GST registration, which has been challenged through the appeal process. The ratio decidendi is that High Courts, in writ proceedings, can direct statutory appellate authorities to expedite the disposal of pending appeals, especially when the petitioner seeks procedural relief and the merits have not been examined by the High Court. The operative direction is the disposal of the appeal within six weeks.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority should be directed to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner expeditiously, considering the retrospective cancellation of GST registration. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that an appeal has been filed against the order cancelling its GST registration and sought a direction from the High Court for the Appellate Authority to dispose of this appeal expeditiously. The petitioner's counsel indicated satisfaction with this procedural relief at this stage. Respondent's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions from the respondent (Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward-71, Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCTD).