Bibhasa Jena vs. The Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Commissionerate

Facts

The Petitioner, Bibhasa Jena, challenged a show cause notice dated 16.11.2025 and an order dated 02.01.2026 passed by the Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Bhubaneswar, which cancelled the Petitioner's registration certificate under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Petitioner expressed willingness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, late fee, penalty, and other dues along with the return. The Petitioner relied on a coordinate Bench's order in W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises Vrs. The Commissioner, C.T & G.S.T, Odisha, Cuttack and Ors.) concerning condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules.

Held

The Court held that the Petitioner should make the payments as undertaken within two weeks. Upon such compliance, the Opposite Party (Revenue) shall consider the application for revocation of the cancellation of the registration certificate within a period not later than six weeks from the date of the order. The Court relied on the conceded position of the Revenue and the precedent set by the coordinate Bench in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises. The ratio decidendi is that where a petitioner undertakes to clear all tax liabilities and complies with the undertaking, the authorities should consider the revocation of registration cancellation, potentially condoning delays in procedural compliance. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner's delay in complying with the requirements for revocation of registration cancellation should be condoned, considering their undertaking to pay all dues. (Question of law). Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioner argued that their claim for relief, including condonation of delay, is covered by the order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, which directed consideration of revocation applications subject to deposit of all dues and compliance with formalities. Revenue's Argument: The Revenue conceded that if the Petitioner complies with the undertaking and deposits the amounts, the concerned authority shall take necessary action.