Banti Kumar vs. Assistant Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, Banti Kumar, operating as M/s BBS Enterprises & Trading, is a proprietorship firm dealing in works contract and registered under the CGST Act, 2017. The Assistant Commissioner, State Goods & Service Tax, Kichha, Uttarakhand, cancelled the petitioner's GST registration on May 7, 2024, due to non-filing of GST returns. The petitioner sought to quash the cancellation order and the preceding show cause notice, and to revive their GST registration. The petitioner stated readiness to pay all outstanding GST, interest, and penalties. The petitioner also referred to a previous identical case decided by the High Court.
Held
The Court noted the consensus between the parties and that the matter was covered by a previous order of the High Court in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024. The Court directed the petitioner to file an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, within two weeks. Along with this application, the petitioner must furnish all pending GST returns and deposit the outstanding tax and dues. Upon receipt of such an application within the stipulated period, the Competent Authority is directed to consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within four weeks thereafter. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of these directions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns, when the petitioner is ready to deposit all dues, is legally sustainable? (Question of law turning on Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017 and relevant rules). The petitioner argued that they are prepared to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fees, and sought revival of their registration. They relied on a previous judgment of the High Court in a similar case (WPMS No. 2285 of 2024). The respondent did not oppose the petitioner's submissions.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 30(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024:UHC:7054 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No.2591 of 2024 Banti Kumar
--Petitioner
Versus Assistant Commissioner, State Goods & Service Tax, Kichha, Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Presence:-
Mr. Ravindra S. Rawat, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, learned Brief Holder for the State. Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Petitioner is a proprietorship firm who runs a business under the name and style ‘M/s BBS Enterprises & Trading’. Petitioner deals with works contract. Petitioner is registered under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short “the CGST Act, 2017”).
The registration of the petitioner has been cancelled by respondent vide order dated 07.05.2024 for non filing of the GST return.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that now the petitioner is ready to make the payment towards GST return as well as the penalty, if any, imposed by the respondent-department.
Petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- “i. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order for Cancel
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.