Bikash Chandra Nayak Vs Chief Commissioner, Central Tax
Date: December 15, 2024
Court: High Court
Bench: Orissa
Type: Writ Petition
Subject Matter
Revocation of GST registration allowed upon payment of dues
Summary
The case involves a petition challenging the cancellation of a taxpayer's GST registration. The petitioner received a show cause notice on February 6, 2024, followed by an order on April 23, 2024, cancelling their registration. The petitioner expressed willingness to pay all outstanding taxes, interest, penalties, and late fees necessary for compliance and sought relief on the basis of a prior court ruling in the case of M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha. In that precedent, the court had condoned a delay in invoking Rule 23 of the Odisha GST Rules, allowing the revocation of GST registration upon payment of dues and compliance with formalities. The court recognized the relevance of this previous decision to the petitioner's situation and agreed to condone the delay in this case as well. The court directed the department to process the revocation application once the petitioner complied with the payment of all required dues, ensuring that businesses can reinstate their operations despite procedural lapses, provided they fulfill their tax obligations. The writ petition was ultimately disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ORISSA HIGH COURT
1. Mr. Padhy, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 6th February, 2024 followed by order dated 23rd April, 2024 cancelling his client’s registration under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He submits, his client is ready and willing to pay the tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other sum required to be paid for the return form of his client to be accepted by the department. He relies on order dated 16thNovember, 2022 of coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) no.30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others). He submits, his client’s claim to relief including prayer for condonation of delay is covered by said order.
2. Mr. Kedia, learned advocate, Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the department.
3. We reproduce below paragraph-2 from said order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (supra).
“2. In that view of the matter, the delay in Petitioner’s invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned and it is directed that subject to the Petitioner depositing all the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc., due and complying with other formalities, the Petitioner’s application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law.”
Likewise direction is made in this writ petition. Petitioner gets the relief in the interest of revenue.
4. The writ petition is disposed of.