Manoj Kumar vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services Dehradun

Facts

The petitioner, Manoj Kumar, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 14.01.2026, passed by respondent No. 2, which cancelled the GST registration of his firm. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to furnish bank details within 30 days of obtaining registration, as stipulated by Rule 10A. The petitioner stated his readiness to provide the required bank details and sought liberty to file a revocation application before the department. He requested the Court to direct the department to consider such an application.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition without interfering with the impugned order. It granted liberty to the petitioner to move an application for revocation of the order cancelling his GST registration. The Court directed that in the event such an application is filed, it shall be decided in accordance with law. The Court noted the petitioner's readiness to provide bank details and the Revenue's statement that any revocation application would be considered as per law. No specific finding was made on the validity of the cancellation order itself, as the matter was resolved by granting liberty to apply for revocation.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration under Rule 10A for failure to furnish bank details within 30 days is valid, and if the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to rectify the omission? (Question of law and fact, turning on Rule 10A of the CGST Rules). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that he is prepared to furnish the bank details and sought permission to file a revocation application. He requested the Court to direct the respondents to consider this application. Revenue's contention: The counsel for the Revenue stated that if an application for revocation is filed by the petitioner, it will be decided in accordance with the law.