Ms Amar Singh Bisht vs. The Assistant Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, Dr. Govind Singh Latwal, approached the High Court with a modification application (MCC No. 02 of 2025) in WPMB No. 748 of 2025. The petitioner's grievance was that the respondent-officer refused to consider the revocation of an order that had cancelled the petitioner's GST registration. The officer's refusal was based on the premise that the cancellation order was not part of the directions previously issued by the Court, which had only directed the officer to look into the rectification of an application. The State was represented by Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder.
Held
The Court held that in the event the rectification application is ordered in favour of the petitioner, the proceedings for cancellation of registration would necessarily have to be revisited. The Court found it needless to elaborate on this point, considering it self-evident. Therefore, the Court disposed of the modification application by directing the petitioner-applicant to make a representation to the Assistant Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax, Bageshwar, Uttarakhand. This representation should request the officer to also consider recalling and revoking the order that cancelled the petitioner's GST registration. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondent-officer is obligated to consider the revocation of the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, even if the previous Court direction was limited to rectifying an application? (Question of law) The petitioner argued that if the rectification application is ordered in their favour, the cancellation proceedings must be revisited. The State's contentions were not explicitly recorded in the judgment, but the officer's stance indicated a narrow interpretation of the prior court order.
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
2025
WPMB No. 748 of 2025 Hon’ble G. Narendar, C.J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.
Dr. Govind Singh Latwal, learned counsel for the petitioner- applicant.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State. Modification Application (MCC No.02 of 2025)
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant- petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State.
It is submitted that the respondent-officer is refusing to consider the revocation of the order cancelling the registration on the premise that the same is not the part of the directions issued by this Court, and that only the officer has been directed to look into the rectification of the application.
It is needless to say, in the event, the rectification application is ordered in favour of the petitioner therein then the cancellation proceedings cancelling the registration would have to be re- visited.
In that view, we dispose of the modification application by directing the petitioner- applicant to make a representation to the As
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.