M/S.Surveillance System, Sambalpur vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST Odisha , CT And GST Commissionerate , Cuttack Odisha

Held

The Court held that the Petitioner's writ petition would be disposed of based on the conceded position of the parties. The Petitioner was directed to make the payments as undertaken within two weeks. Upon such payment, the Opposite Party (Revenue) 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 reasoning was based on the Petitioner's willingness to clear all dues and the Revenue's concession, aligning with the precedent set in the M/s. Mohanty Enterprises case. The principle established is that a GST registration, once cancelled, can be revoked upon the taxpayer clearing all outstanding liabilities and complying with procedural formalities, with the Court facilitating this process when parties agree.

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s. Surveillance System, Sambalpur, challenged a show cause notice dated July 28, 2025, and the subsequent order dated August 8, 2025, which cancelled its GST registration. The Petitioner expressed willingness to pay all outstanding taxes, interest, late fees, penalties, and any other sums due 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.) which condoned delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules, subject to deposit of dues. The Revenue conceded that if the Petitioner complied with the undertaking, the authority would take necessary action.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner's GST registration, cancelled by an order dated August 8, 2025, based on a show cause notice dated July 28, 2025, should be revoked upon payment of all dues, considering the Petitioner's undertaking to pay taxes, interest, late fees, and penalties. (Question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation of relevant GST provisions and rules regarding cancellation and revocation of registration). Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioner argued that its case is covered by the order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, which allowed for condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules, subject to deposit of all dues. The Petitioner is ready to clear all outstanding liabilities. Revenue's Argument: The Revenue, upon perusal of the cited order, conceded that if the Petitioner fulfills its undertaking to deposit the amounts, the concerned authority should proceed accordingly.