Sunil Sah vs. Union Of INDIA
Facts
The petitioner, Sunil Enterprises, a furniture manufacturer registered under the CGST Act, 2017, had its GST registration cancelled by respondent no. 3 on 22.11.2022, due to non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner sought to quash this cancellation order and obtain a direction to allow them to pay all outstanding GST dues, including interest and penalties. The petitioner stated readiness to comply with all payment obligations. The petitioner also brought to the Court's attention that a similar issue had been decided by a co-ordinate bench in WPMS No. 75 of 2023.
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition is covered by the order passed in WPMS No. 75 of 2023. The petitioner was granted liberty to move an application for revocation or cancellation of the order under Section 30(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, within two weeks from the date of the order. Along with this application, the petitioner must furnish all pending GST returns and deposit the outstanding tax and dues, including interest and penalties. The Competent Authority is directed 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 these directions. 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, as per the order dated 22.11.2022, is liable to be quashed and the registration revoked, in light of the petitioner's willingness to deposit all dues, interest, and penalties? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 29(2) and Section 30 of the CGST Act, 2017). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they are now prepared to clear all pending GST returns for the six-month period, along with any applicable interest and penalties. They relied on the principle that such issues have been resolved favorably by a co-ordinate bench of the same High Court in WPMS No. 75 of 2023 and other similar writ petitions, implying a precedent for allowing such applications. Revenue's contention: The learned State counsel did not oppose the petitioner's submission, indicating an absence of argument against the petitioner's plea.
Sections Cited
Section 29(2), Section 30(2)
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 JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS No.2285 of 2024 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the Union of India.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State.
Petitioner is a shopkeeper, who runs a shop under the name and style of Sunil Enterprises situated at Peeli Kothi, Haldwani. He deals with manufacturing of furniture. The petitioner is registered under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short “CGST Act, 2017”).
Registration of the petitioner has been cancelled by respondent no.3 vide order dated 22.11.2022, for non filing of the GST return for a continuous period of six months.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that now petitioner is ready to make the payment towards GST return for a period of six months as well as penalty, if any, imposed by the respondent-Department.
The petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-
“i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the n
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.