Saumya Ranjan Moharana Vs State Tax Officer (Orissa High Court)
Date: May 15, 2025
Subject Matter
Revocation of cancellation of registration allowed on payment of all outstanding tax dues, including interest, penalties, and late fees
Summary
In the case of Saumya Ranjan Moharana Vs. State Tax Officer, the Orissa High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner by directing the tax authorities to revoke the cancellation of his GST registration. The cancellation was initially based on a show cause notice issued on August 8, 2022, followed by a cancellation order on January 11, 2023. The petitioner was prepared to settle all outstanding tax dues, including interest, penalties, and late fees. The court referenced its earlier judgment from M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, where it allowed for the consideration of revocation applications provided all due payments were made, facilitating a precedent for the current case. The High Court acknowledged that granting relief was in “the interest of revenue.” Consequently, the writ petition was resolved in a manner that enabled the petitioner to regularize his GST status by complying with all necessary financial obligations.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. M.L. Agarwal, learned Advocate appears on behalf of Petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 08.08.2022 followed by order dated 11.01.2023 cancelling her client’s registration under State 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.
3. S. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Department and Mr. A. Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Central Revenue.
4. 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.
5. The writ petition is disposed of.