M/S Narayan Singh Patni Contractor vs. Commissioner, CGST
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Narayan Singh Patni Contractor, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging an order dated 31.05.2024, passed by Respondent No. 2, which cancelled their GST Registration No. 05AWOPP9002D3ZJ. The petitioner sought quashing of this cancellation order and a direction to permit them to file an application for revocation of the cancellation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017, with the Competent Authority to consider it in accordance with law. The petitioner expressed willingness to deposit all outstanding dues, including tax, interest, and penalty, within two weeks.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction. It ordered that if the petitioner files an application and deposits the entire outstanding dues of tax, including interest and penalty, within two weeks from the date of the order, the Competent Authority shall consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within two weeks thereafter. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The primary finding is that the petitioner should be given an opportunity to regularize their GST compliance by depositing dues, and the authority should consider their application.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file an application for revocation of their cancelled GST registration, and if so, whether the Competent Authority should be directed to consider such an application in accordance with law, particularly in light of the petitioner's willingness to deposit outstanding dues. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they were willing to deposit the entire outstanding dues of tax, including interest and penalty, within two weeks and intended to move an application to the Competent Authority for this purpose. They sought directions for the Competent Authority to consider their revocation application. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the respondents sought two weeks' time to decide the petitioner's application.
Sections Cited
Section 30
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2025:UHC:52 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
03rd JANUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.3701 of 2024
M/S Narayan Singh Patni Contractor
..…Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate, Dehradun and Another
..…Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Singh Mahra,
Advocate.
Counsel for the : Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Respondents
Advocate (through video
conferencing).
Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
Present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the record of the case and quashing the order dated 31.05.2024 (Annexure No.2) (Ref. No.ZA050524043378J) passed by the respondent No.2, whereby GST Registration No.05AWOPP9002D3ZJ of the petitioner’s was cancellation. (ii) Issue a suitable writ, order or directi
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.