Ms Himalayan Homes Construction And Consultant Services vs. Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Himalayan Homes Construction and Consultant Services, a proprietorship firm dealing in works contract, had its GST registration cancelled by Respondent No. 3 on January 17, 2022, due to non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner is ready to pay all outstanding GST dues, interest, and any imposed penalties. The petitioner sought to quash the cancellation order and the appellate order, and to be permitted to prefer a representation before Respondent No. 2 for consideration of their application for revocation of cancellation. The petitioner relies on a previous order of this Court in a similar matter.
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition is covered by the order passed in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024. The petitioner is granted liberty to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, within two weeks. This application must be accompanied by all pending GST returns and the deposit of 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 in accordance with the law within four weeks thereafter. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns for six months can be revoked upon the petitioner's willingness to pay all outstanding dues, interest, and penalties? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argues that since they are now prepared to clear all their tax liabilities, interest, and late fees, the cancellation of their GST registration should be quashed. They rely on the principle that tax authorities should consider allowing revocation when the taxpayer is willing to regularize their compliance. They also refer to an identical controversy decided by this Court in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024. Revenue's contention: The learned counsel for the respondents did not oppose the petitioner's submission, indicating a consensus on the matter being covered by the previous High Court order.
Sections Cited
Section 30(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024:UHC:6961 1
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2455 of 2024 23rd September, 2024
Ms Himalayan Homes Construction and Consultant Services …..Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner and others …..Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Tarun Pande, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the respondents. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Petitioner is a proprietorship firm who runs a business under the name and style ‘M/s Himalyan Homes Construction & Consultant Services’. 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 no.3 vide order dated 17.01.2022 for non filing of the GST return for a continuous period of six months.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that now the petitioner is re
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.