Naushad Scrap Ind Gstin vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate
Facts
The petitioner challenged the cancellation of their GST registration, an order dated 04.04.2022. The petitioner's counsel stated that the petitioner had already deposited penalties and dues and was willing to pay any further amounts owed to the GST Department. The petitioner also argued that the present case was covered by a previous order of the High Court dated 25.08.2023 in Writ Petition (M/S) No.2382 of 2023, M/S Rana Building Material Supplier GSTIN vs. Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate and another. The State counsel acknowledged that the matter was indeed covered by the aforementioned order.
Held
The Court decided the matter in terms of its previous order dated 25.08.2023, passed in Writ Petition (M/S) No.2382 of 2023, M/S Rana Building Material Supplier GSTIN vs. Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate and another. While the specific details of the previous order are not elaborated in this judgment, the admission by the State counsel that the present case is covered by it indicates that the relief granted in the previous order would apply here. The reasoning likely hinges on the principle that if a petitioner has shown willingness to clear dues and penalties, and a precedent exists for such situations, the cancellation of registration might be revisited or set aside, possibly with directions to reinstate the registration upon compliance. The operative directions would be to follow the precedent set by the earlier writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration is justified in light of the petitioner's willingness to deposit all dues and penalties, and the existence of a binding precedent from this Court? (Question of law and fact) Contentions: Petitioner: The petitioner argued that they have already deposited penalties and dues and are prepared to pay any remaining amounts. They contended that the issue is squarely covered by this Court's order dated 25.08.2023 in Writ Petition (M/S) No.2382 of 2023, M/S Rana Building Material Supplier GSTIN vs. Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate and another. Revenue/State: The State counsel admitted that the matter is covered by the order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Writ Petition (M/S) No.2382 of 2023.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
WPMS No.2776 of 2023 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Tarun Pande, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel with Mr. Tarun Lakhera, Brief Holder for the State. The challenge in this petition is made to cancellation of GST Registration order dated 04.04.2022. Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has deposited penalty and dues. The petitioner is still ready and willing to pay any amount that may be payable by him to the GST Department. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also submit that the matter is squarely covered by the order dated 25.08.2023, passed by this Court in Writ Petition (M/S) No.2382 of 2023, M/S another (“the petition”). Learned State counsel admits that the matter is covered by the order dated 25.08.2023, passed in the petition. The matter is decided in terms of the order dated 25.08.2023,
passed in Writ Petition (M/S) No.2382 of 2023, M/S Services Tax Commissio
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.