Firasat Rasool vs. State Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, Firasat Rasool Contractor, has challenged an order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the State Tax Officer (STO), Haldwani, which cancelled the petitioner's GST registration. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to file returns within the prescribed period. The petitioner relies on a previous order from a Coordinate Bench in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025, where a similar situation was addressed. In that case, the Court permitted the petitioner to apply for revocation of the cancellation order, subject to depositing unpaid tax, interest, and penalty, and directed the authority to decide the application.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition in the same terms as Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025. This means the petitioner is permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order within two weeks from the date of the order. Upon filing such an application, and furnishing all pending returns, along with the deposit of unpaid tax, interest, and penalty, the Competent Authority is directed to consider the petitioner's prayer for revocation in accordance with the law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the application. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file an application for revocation of the GST registration cancellation order, similar to the relief granted in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 39 of 2025? The petitioner argued that in identical facts and circumstances, a Coordinate Bench had permitted the petitioner in WPMB No. 39 of 2025 to file an application for revocation of the cancellation order. The petitioner contended that they should be granted similar liberty. The respondent, represented by the State of Uttarakhand, had no objection to the present writ petition being disposed of in the same terms as the aforementioned writ petition.