Dalip Singh vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Dalip Singh, a taxable person registered under the GST Act, 2017, filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of his GST registration. The cancellation order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3, on March 12, 2024. The show cause notice dated February 23, 2024, indicated that the cancellation was due to the petitioner's failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period. The petitioner sought similar relief as granted in a previous writ petition (Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024), where the petitioner was permitted to apply for revocation of cancellation and the authority was directed to consider it. The State's counsel had no objection to this course of action.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the judgment dated February 24, 2025, rendered in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. The petitioner was permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If the petitioner filed such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, furnished all pending returns, and deposited the unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the Competent Authority was directed to consider the prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the application. The Court noted that the respondents had no objection to this relief. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application for revocation of the cancellation of his GST registration, given his failure to furnish GST returns for the prescribed period? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that a similar order was passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, allowing the petitioner to apply for revocation of cancellation and directing the Competent Authority to consider the application. The petitioner sought a similar direction in the present case. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the respondents (State of Uttarakhand) submitted that she had no objection if the petitioner was permitted to move an appropriate application for revocation of the cancellation order.
Sections Cited
GST Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT : (PER : SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.)
Learned counsel for the parties submit that the instant writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 24.02.2025, rendered in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025, which reads as under: “Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand through video conferencing.
Petitioner is a taxable person, registered under GST Act, 2017. His GST registration has been cancelled by Assistant Commissioner, Haridwar-Sector 3 vide order dated 12.03.2024. Challenging the cancellation order, petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
The show cause notice issued to the petitioner on 23.02.2024 reveals that cancellation has been ordered on account of petitioner’s failure to furnish GST returns for prescribed period.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a judgment rendered by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3283 of 2024, whereby, petitioner in that case was UKHC010169382026
2026:UHC:8630-DB 2
permitted to make application for revocation of the cancellation order and the Competent Authority was directed to consider the application and pass appropriate order as per law, within four weeks thereafter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a similar order be passed in the present case also.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder submits that she has no objection if petitioner is permitted to move appropriate application for revocation of cancellation order.
Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of by permitting petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If he makes such application within two weeks from today and also furnishes all the pending returns and deposits unpaid tax along with interest and amount of penalty, the Competent Authority shall consider the petitioner’s prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of such application.”
The submission of both the counsels is placed on record.
The instant Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of relief granted in Paragraph No. 8 of the judgment dated 24.02.2025, rendered in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. 4. The Writ Petition stands ordered accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.
_____________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
_____________ ALOK MAHRA, J.
Dt: 24th September, 2026 Rathour PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=23699ccc2fd40ad81b6fd13323779d9e3aeb10 97d17dbb53d481cabd25946eed, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=1F65499E931DF71CDAF92A40CC6179B 8E010331BA695239171F906FD5C45C4E8, cn=PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2026.09.25 15:13:10 +05'30'
Reproduced from the public record of the Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.