S S Gariya And Sons Construction Gstin (Gstin(05Adkfs9826P1Z5) vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate
Held
The Court held that the instant petition is decided in terms of the order dated 25.08.2023, passed in WPMS No.2382 of 2023. The reasoning is based on the admission by the State Counsel that the present case is squarely covered by the earlier order. Consequently, the Court implicitly found that the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration was not in accordance with the principles laid down in the prior judgment. The ratio decidendi is that if a case is factually identical to a previously decided case by the same court, and the revenue concedes this, the same relief should be granted. The operative direction is to decide the instant petition in terms of the previous order, implying the cancellation order is likely to be set aside or reconsidered as per the directions in WPMS No.2382 of 2023. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 11.05.2023, which cancelled their Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration. The petitioner contended that their case was covered by a previous order passed by the same Court on 25.08.2023 in a similar matter, WPMS No.2382 of 2023, M/s Rana Building Material Supplier GSTIN Vs. Commissioner State Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate. The Standing Counsel for the State acknowledged that the present case was indeed squarely covered by the aforementioned order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order cancelling the petitioner's GST registration is liable to be set aside in light of the previous order of this Court dated 25.08.2023 in WPMS No.2382 of 2023? The petitioner argued that the present case is identical to the facts and circumstances dealt with in WPMS No.2382 of 2023, and therefore, the outcome should be the same. The petitioner relied on the order dated 25.08.2023. The State, through its Standing Counsel, conceded that the matter is squarely covered by the order dated 25.08.2023, implying no contrary arguments were presented by the revenue.
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.2647 of 2023 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Tarun Pande and Mr. Ashish Agarwal, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State. The challenge in this petition is made to order cancelling the Goods and Services Tax Registration of the petitioner dated 11.05.2023. Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the matter is squarely covered by the order dated 25.08.2023, passed in WPMS No.2382 of 2023, M/s Tax Commissionerate (“the first Petition”). Learned State Counsel admits that the matter is squarely covered by the order dated 25.08 .2023, passed in the first Petition. The instant petition is decided in terms of order dated 25.08.2023, passed in the first Petition.
(Ravindra Maithani J.)
2023 RV
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.