Sushil Kumar Nainwal vs. Assistant Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax

Facts

The petitioner, Sushil Kumar Nainiwal, had his GST registration cancelled on May 8, 2024. He applied for revocation on November 22, 2024. A show-cause notice was issued on December 7, 2024, stating that his revocation application was liable to be rejected due to excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) of ₹8,04,528.74 availed during April and May 2025, and requesting details of inward and outward supplies and bank account payments. The petitioner contended that the excess ITC was due to a calculation mistake. By an order dated March 29, 2025, the application for revocation was rejected. The petitioner subsequently deposited the wrongly availed ITC amount of ₹8,04,528.74 on March 2, 2026, through JRC-03.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by allowing the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the Department. This representation should be accompanied by evidence demonstrating that the wrongly availed ITC amount has been deposited. Upon receiving such a representation, the Department is directed to examine the petitioner's claim and take a fresh decision in the matter within four weeks from the date the representation is filed. The Court noted the petitioner's submission that the excess ITC of ₹8,04,528.74 was a result of a calculation mistake and that this amount was deposited on March 2, 2026. The Revenue's counsel acknowledged this and agreed to revisit the request upon proper representation. No specific provision of law was directly interpreted or applied to decide the merits of the revocation itself, but rather the procedural aspect of revisiting the application was addressed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's application for revocation of GST registration cancellation should be considered, given that the excess ITC availed due to a calculation mistake has now been deposited. The petitioner argued that the excess ITC of ₹8,04,528.74 was availed due to a calculation mistake and that this amount has since been deposited on March 2, 2026, through JRC-03. Therefore, the respondents should reconsider his request for revocation of the GST registration cancellation based on this deposit. The respondents, through the learned counsel for the State, fairly stated that if the petitioner makes a representation demonstrating the deposit of the wrongly availed ITC, the Department will revisit the request for revocation of the GST registration cancellation.