Aftab Husain vs. Union Of INDIA
Facts
The petitioner, Aftab Husain, operating as 'AR Hardware Supplier', is registered under the CGST Act, 2017. The registration was cancelled by Respondent No. 3 on February 28, 2023, due to non-filing of GST returns. The petitioner now expresses readiness to pay all outstanding GST dues, including penalties, for the entire period. The petitioner sought to quash the cancellation order and direct the respondents to allow the filing of GST returns. The petitioner also highlighted that a similar controversy was decided by the High Court in a previous writ petition.
Held
The Court noted that the respondents did not oppose the petitioner's submissions and acknowledged that the matter was covered by a previous order of the Court in WPMS No. 2285 of 2024. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to move an application for revocation or cancellation of the 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 with interest and penalties. The Competent Authority is then required 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 this order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to have their GST registration revoked and their GST returns accepted, despite the prior cancellation order for non-filing, if they are now willing to pay all outstanding dues, interest, and penalties? (Question of law and fact, concerning the powers of the authority under the CGST Act, 2017). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they are prepared to clear all pending GST liabilities, including interest and penalties, and sought to have their registration revoked and returns accepted. They relied on a previous order of the High Court in a similar case (WPMS No. 2285 of 2024) to support their claim. Respondents' Contention: The learned counsel for the respondents did not oppose the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel. No specific arguments or reliance on provisions/precedents were recorded for the respondents.
Sections Cited
Section 30(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024:UHC:7346 1
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2686 of 2024 03rd October, 2024 Aftab Husain ….Petitioner Versus
Union of India and others ……Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Ujjwal Gunwant, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the Union of India/respondent no.
Mr. Suyash Pant and Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondent no.
Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for respondent no.3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Petitioner is a proprietorship firm who runs a business under the name and style ‘AR Hardware Supplier’. Petitioner deals in hardware tools. 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 28.02.2023 for non filing of his GST 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.