Talasethi Sanmukharao vs. Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, Cuttack

Held

The Court held that in view of the conceded position by the Department and the petitioner's undertaking to clear all dues, the writ petition would be disposed of. The petitioner was directed to make the payments as undertaken within two weeks. Upon such compliance, the opposite parties (the revenue) were directed to consider the petitioner's application for revocation of the cancellation of his registration certificate within a period not later than six weeks from the date of the order. The ratio of the decision is that a taxpayer willing to clear all dues, including taxes, interest, and penalties, should be granted an opportunity to have their GST registration reinstated, even if there was an initial delay, by following the procedure laid down in Rule 23 of the OGST Rules, as interpreted by coordinate benches.

Facts

The petitioner, Talasethi Sanmukharao, challenged a show cause notice dated November 28, 2025, and the subsequent order dated December 22, 2025, passed by the Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha & Cuttack, which cancelled his GST registration. The petitioner stated his willingness to pay all outstanding taxes, interest, late fees, penalties, and any other dues. He 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 Standing Counsel for the Department conceded that if the petitioner complied with the undertaking, the authority would take necessary action.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's delay in complying with the requirements for revocation of GST registration cancellation should be condoned, in light of the undertaking to pay all dues and the precedent set by a coordinate bench? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that his case is covered by the order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, where a coordinate bench condoned the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules, subject to the deposit of all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty, etc. He submitted that he is ready to make these payments and seeks similar relief. Revenue's Argument: The Standing Counsel for the Department, upon perusal of the cited order, conceded that if the petitioner fulfills his undertaking and deposits the amounts due, the concerned authority shall proceed accordingly.