Mahesh Ram vs. Assistant Commissioner State Tax
Facts
The petitioner challenged a show-cause notice for cancellation of their GST registration and the subsequent order of cancellation. The petitioner argued that the issue was squarely covered by a previous judgment of the Division Bench of the same High Court in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs. State Tax Officer, dated 24.02.2025. The respondents, represented by the State, admitted that the controversy was indeed covered by the aforementioned judgment. The writ petition was filed in 2025.
Held
The Court held that since the respondents admitted that the controversy in the present writ petition was squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment dated 24.02.2025 in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs. State Tax Officer, the instant petition was decided in terms of that judgment. The reasoning is based on the principle of judicial precedent, where a coordinate bench is bound by the decision of a larger bench or a co-equal bench on similar facts and issues. The operative direction was to decide the petition in terms of the Division Bench judgment, implying that the relief granted in that judgment would apply here. No specific issue was left undecided, as the matter was resolved by applying the existing precedent.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present writ petition is covered by the Division Bench judgment dated 24.02.2025 in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs. State Tax Officer, concerning the cancellation of GST registration. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner contended that the facts and legal issues in their case are identical to those decided in the Division Bench judgment of M/s Anshul Enterprises, and therefore, the present petition should be decided in line with that precedent. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondents (State) admitted that the controversy in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment cited by the petitioner.
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 JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMB No.843 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Pankaj Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Pooja Banga, Brief Holder for the State. The challenge in this writ petition is made to the show-cause notice for cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner as well as the order of cancellation of registration of the petitioner. 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 M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs. State Tax Officer.
(Alok Mahra J.)
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.