Pradeep Kumar Mohapatra Vs Commissioner
Date: January 7, 2025
Court: High Court
Bench: Orissa
Type: Writ Petition
Subject Matter
Delay in filing of 'Revocation of GST registration cancellation' allowed subject to payment of all dues
Summary
In the case of Pradeep Kumar Mohapatra vs Commissioner, the petitioner disputed the cancellation of his GST registration, which occurred via an order on January 10, 2021, following a show cause notice dated December 28, 2020. The petitioner was ready to pay all pending tax liabilities, including interest, penalties, and late fees, to have his GST registration reinstated. He relied on a precedent from a prior case (Mohanty Enterprises vs Commissioner) where the court had condoned a delay in filing for revocation of GST registration, provided certain conditions were met. The court agreed with the petitioner and directed that his request for revocation be considered, contingent upon the payment of all dues and compliance with other legal requirements. This decision affirms the approach from the earlier case, signaling the court's willingness to allow revocation in the interest of revenue collection. Ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of, granting the petitioner a conditional opportunity to restore his GST registration.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ORISSA HIGH COURT
1. Mr. Roy Choudhury, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 28th December, 2020 followed by order dated 10th January, 2021 cancelling his client’s registration under Odisha 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 16th November, 2022 of coordinate Bench in 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. Chimanka, learned advocate, Senior 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.