Ayush Sharma vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash the cancellation of their GST registration, which was ordered on 10/11/2022. The petitioner expressed readiness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees. They also sought permission to file an application for revocation of the cancellation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017, and requested the respondent to consider this application in accordance with the law. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the present case was squarely covered by a previous judgment of the Division Bench of the same High Court, dated 24.02.2025, in the case of M/s Anshul Enterprises Vs. State Tax Officer. This submission was admitted by the counsel for the respondents.
Held
The Court held that the instant petition is decided in terms of the judgment dated 24.02.2025, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs. State Tax Officer. The reasoning and ratio decidendi of the Division Bench judgment are therefore applied to this case. The operative direction is to decide the present petition in line with the precedent. The specific relief granted to the petitioner is implicitly to proceed as per the directions in the M/s Anshul Enterprises case, which likely involves allowing the petitioner to file for revocation of their GST registration upon payment of dues, and directing the authorities to consider such an application. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration order dated 10/11/2022 should be quashed, given the petitioner's willingness to pay all dues, pursuant to Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that their case is covered by the Division Bench judgment in M/s Anshul Enterprises Vs. State Tax Officer, which presumably allowed for revocation of GST registration upon payment of dues. They sought a writ of certiorari to quash the cancellation order and a writ of mandamus to permit them to file a revocation application under Section 30 of the Act, with a direction for its consideration. Revenue/State's Arguments: The learned counsel for the State admitted that the matter is covered by the aforementioned Division Bench judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 30
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
2026
WPMB No.282 of 2026 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Mr. Tarun Pandey and Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Pooja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State through V.C.
Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking 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 10/11/2022 (Annexure No.3 to W.P Page no.1.5) as petitioner is ready to pay all the balance tax, interest on it and late fee if any. 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 05FTIPS2066C1ZP of the Petitioner and further direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the application of the Petitioner in accordance with law. C. Issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble court deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the present case. Award the cost to the petitioner throughout.”
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy is squarely covered by the judgment dated 24.02.2025, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs.
State Tax Officer.
This fact is admitted by learned counsel for the respondents.
Since, the matter is covered, instant petition is decided in terms of the judgment dated 24.02.2025, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its BS
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.