Ms Velly Restaurent vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Velly Restaurant, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging the cancellation of its GST registration. The respondents, the State of Uttarakhand and others, argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which allows for an application to revoke the cancellation of registration. The petitioner conceded that no such application had been filed. The order under challenge was dated 23.06.2025. The court noted that the application under Section 30 is typically required to be made within 90 days.

Held

The Court acknowledged that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017, for revocation of GST registration cancellation. However, considering the initial stage of the Act's enforcement and the potential complexity for ordinary citizens, the Court decided not to let the limitation period strictly bar reconsideration. The Court emphasized that cancellation of registration directly impacts livelihood and can lead to revenue loss for the State. Therefore, the Court condoned the delay in invoking Section 30. The Court directed that if the petitioner files an application under Section 30 within three weeks from the date of the order, it shall be considered and disposed of within three weeks thereafter. The petitioner was also directed to file all pending returns up to the date of the cancellation order. The order dated 23.06.2025 was set aside.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, M/s Velly Restaurant, has an alternative remedy available for challenging the cancellation of its GST registration under Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, through its counsel, fairly submitted that no application had been preferred under Section 30 of the Act. No further arguments were recorded for the petitioner on this point. Respondents' contention: The respondents, through their counsel, submitted that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, wherein a registered dealer whose registration has been cancelled is entitled to make an application to revoke such cancellation.