Ms Faim Uddin Gstin vs. Commissioner State Goods And Service Tax Dehradun
Facts
The petitioner, whose GST registration was cancelled by an order dated 05.02.2019 issued by respondent no. 2, challenged this order. The cancellation was due to default in making Goods and Services Tax payments. The petitioner expressed willingness to deposit all outstanding dues and penalties and make a representation to the authorities for revocation of the cancellation. The State counsel did not dispute the petitioner's contention and stated that the issue was covered by a previous judgment of the High Court. The State agreed that if the petitioner deposited dues and penalties and made a representation, it would be considered by the department.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner is at liberty to deposit all outstanding dues, including tax and penalty, and make a representation to the respondent-authorities within one month. Following this, the concerned respondent authority shall decide the representation within two weeks by issuing a reasoned and speaking order. This direction is based on the understanding that the issue is covered by a previous judgment of the Court and the State's agreement to consider the petitioner's representation upon compliance with the deposit and representation requirements. The writ petition was disposed of subject to these directions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for default in payment of tax is amenable to revocation upon deposit of dues and penalties and submission of a representation? (Question of law) The petitioner argued that due to default in GST payment, their registration was cancelled, but they are ready to deposit all dues and penalties and make a representation for revocation. The State argued that the issue is covered by a previous High Court judgment and that if the petitioner deposits all dues and penalties and makes a representation, the department will consider it.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text.
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
WPMS No. 137 of 2023 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State accepts notice for respondents.
Petitioner is challenging the order dated 05.02.2019 issued by respondent no. 2 for cancellation of the GST registration.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to default in making payment of Goods and Services Tax, his registration has been cancelled. The petitioner is ready and willing to deposit all the dues and make a representation to the authorities concerned so that his cancellation order may be revoked.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents has not disputed that the issue is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court on 09.11.2023, passed in WPMS No. 3154 of 2023. He would submit that if the petitioner deposits all the dues along with penalty and makes a representation, the same shall be considered by the department.
The
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.