Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of Odisha

Held

The Court held that the Petitioner's claim for relief, including the condonation of delay in revoking the cancellation of his GST registration, was covered by the precedent set in the case of M/s. Mohanty Enterprises. The Court directed the Petitioner to make all the payments as undertaken within two weeks. Upon the Petitioner's compliance, the Opposite Party (the concerned authority) was directed to 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 found the Petitioner's undertaking to pay all dues and the Department's concession to be the basis for its decision. The Writ Petition was disposed of in light of these directions.

Facts

The Petitioner, Gagan Bihari Rout @ Gagan Rout, challenged a show cause notice dated 24.05.2025 and the subsequent order dated 24.06.2025 passed by an authority of the State of Odisha, which cancelled his GST registration certificate. The Petitioner expressed willingness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, late fee, penalty, and any other applicable sums along with the return. He relied on a previous order from a coordinate bench 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 a rule for revocation. The Opposite Party (State of Odisha & Ors.) conceded that if the Petitioner complied with the undertaking, the concerned authority would act accordingly.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner's delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) for revocation of cancellation of registration should be condoned, and if so, on what conditions? Petitioner's contention: The Petitioner argued that his case is covered by the order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, which condoned the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules, subject to deposit of all dues and compliance with formalities. He sought similar relief, including condonation of delay. Revenue's contention: The Additional Standing Counsel for the Department, upon reviewing the cited order, conceded that if the Petitioner fulfilled his undertaking to deposit the amounts due, the authority would proceed accordingly. No specific arguments against condonation or conditions were recorded beyond this concession.