Saroj Kumar Sahu vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, Cuttack
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Saroj Kumar Sahu, challenged a show cause notice dated August 4, 2025, and the subsequent order dated September 15, 2025, issued by the Commissioner, CT & GST Odisha, Cuttack, which cancelled his GST registration. The petitioner expressed willingness to pay all outstanding taxes, interest, late fees, and penalties. He relied on a coordinate bench's order in W.P.(C) No. 30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others), which condoned delay in invoking a rule and directed consideration of revocation applications upon deposit of dues. The Additional Standing Counsel for the revenue conceded that if the petitioner complied with the undertaking, the authority would act accordingly.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner's case was covered by the precedent set in W.P.(C) No. 30374 of 2022. The Court directed the petitioner to make all payments, including taxes, interest, late fees, and penalties, within two weeks. Upon such compliance, the opposite party (revenue) was directed to consider the petitioner's application for revocation of the cancellation of his GST registration certificate within six weeks from the date of the order. The Court found that the conceded position of the revenue supported this course of action. The writ petition was disposed of in light of these directions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's delay in complying with the requirements for revocation of GST registration cancellation should be condoned, considering his undertaking to pay all dues. (Question of law and fact, turning on the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules and principles of equity). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that his case is covered by the coordinate bench's order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, which condoned delay and directed consideration of revocation upon deposit of dues. He is ready to pay all taxes, interest, late fees, and penalties. Revenue's contention: The Additional Standing Counsel for the department conceded that if the petitioner fulfills his undertaking to deposit the amounts, the concerned authority should proceed with the revocation application.
Sections Cited
Rule 23
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 30.09.2026
This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
Learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits that the show cause notice dated 4th August, 2025 followed by order dated 15th September, 2025 cancelling the registration certificate of the petitioner under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is under challenge. He submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other sum required to be paid along with the return. He relies on order dated 16th November, 2022 of coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others), wherein it has been observed as follows:- "
In that view of the matter, the delay in Petitioner’s invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned and it is directed that subject to the Petitioner depositing all the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc., due and complying with other formalities, the Petitioner’s application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law."
He submits, the claim of the petitioner to relief including prayer for condonation of delay is covered by said order.
Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Department-opposite parties upon perusal of said order, conceded that in the event the petitioner complies with the requirement and deposits the amounts as undertaken, the authority concerned shall do the needful.
In view of conceded position, the petitioner shall make payments as undertaken within a period of two weeks hence and on such eventuality the opposite party shall consider application for revocation of cancellation of the registration certificate within a period not later than six weeks from today.
In view of the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge
(M.S. Raman) Judge
Gitanjali
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.