Harish Singh Rawat vs. State Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Harish Singh Rawat, had his GST registration cancelled by the State Tax Officer due to non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months. The cancellation order was dated 04-12-2023. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash this cancellation order, stating his readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. He also sought a direction to permit him to file an application for revocation of the cancellation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017, and for the respondent to consider it in accordance with law. The petitioner's GSTIN is 05EDSPS0460K1Z2. The dispute involves the cancellation of GST registration.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of a previous identical order dated 24.02.2025 in WPMB No. 39 of 2025. The petitioner was permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If the petitioner files such an application within two weeks from the date of the order, and simultaneously furnishes all pending returns and deposits the unpaid tax along with applicable interest and penalty, the Competent Authority is directed to consider the petitioner's prayer for revocation in accordance with the law. This consideration must be completed within four weeks from the date of receipt of the petitioner's application. The Court's decision is based on the precedent set in the earlier writ petition, allowing a procedural remedy for the petitioner to regularize his compliance and seek revocation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns for six consecutive months, despite the petitioner's willingness to regularize the compliance, warrants interference by this Court under its writ jurisdiction, specifically concerning the application of Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that he is prepared to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. He sought permission to file an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017, and requested the respondent authority to consider such an application in accordance with the law. The petitioner relied on the principle that genuine attempts to comply should be considered. Respondent's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent, the State Tax Officer. However, the respondent's action under challenge is the cancellation of the GST registration.
Sections Cited
Section 30
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
UKHC010155732026
2026:UHC:8028-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMB/720/2026
Harish Singh Rawat --Petitioner Versus State Tax Officer --Respondent
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Mr. Ashish Gupta and Mr. Akshay Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State through video conferencing.
Petitioner's GST registration was cancelled for non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months.
By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “a. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the record of the case and quash the cancellation of GST Registration order dated 04-12-2023 (Annexure No. 3 to W.P) as petitioner is ready to pay all the e balance tax, interest on it and late fee if any. (Page No-18) b. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus permitting the petitioner to prefer an application U/S 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act 2017, for filing an application for revocation of the cancellation of the GST registration bearing number GSTIN 05EDSPS0460K1Z2 of the Petitioner and UKHC010155732026
2026:UHC:8028-DB further direct the Respondent to consider the application of the Petitioner in accordance with law.”
Learned counsel for the parties are unanimous on the point that an identical issue was dealt with by this Court in WPMB No. 39 of 2025, on 24.02.2025. 6. In such view of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 24.02.2025, by permitting the 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 the unpaid tax along with interest and the 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.
(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
2026 BS
BALWANT SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c 02fe2eacbf28cdf4ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB55 3DE5185F418755DC00A7A13C14A680C3FA90, cn=BALWANT SINGH Date: 2026.09.07 18:57:59 +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.