Case Law Details
King Kong Blue Bar And Restaurant Vs Commissioner (Uttarakhand High Court)
The Uttarakhand High Court dealt with a writ petition challenging cancellation of GST registration dated 09.01.2023 on the ground of failure to file returns, and the subsequent appellate order dated 27.02.2026 rejecting the appeal as time-barred. The petitioner sought relief similar to an earlier decision in WPMB No. 39 of 2025, where a Coordinate Bench permitted filing of an application for revocation of cancellation subject to compliance conditions. It was submitted that if the petitioner files such an application within two weeks, furnishes all pending returns, and deposits unpaid tax along with applicable interest and penalty, the competent authority may consider revocation in accordance with law. The respondent did not object to granting similar relief. Accepting this, the Court disposed of the writ petition in the same terms, allowing the petitioner to apply for revocation subject to the stated conditions and directing the competent authority to decide the application within the prescribed timeframe.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
1. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 09.01.2023 passed by respondent No. 3 cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner-firm on the ground that it has failed to file the returns within the prescribed period and the order dated 27.02.2026, rejecting the appeal as barred by limitation.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical facts and circumstances in WPMB No. 39 of 2025, a Coordinate Bench has permitted the petitioner therein to file an application for revocation of the cancellation order and subject to deposit of unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the competent authority has been directed to decide the application for revocation of the cancellation order. The operative part of the order passed in the said writ petition is as follows:
“8. Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of by permitting petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If he makes such application within two weeks from today and also furnishes all the pending returns and deposits unpaid tax along with interest and amount of penalty, the Competent Authority shall consider the petitioner’s prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of such application.”
3. It is urged that similar liberty may be granted to the petitioner.
4. Ms. Puja Banga, learned counsel for the respondents, has no objection in case the present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as WPMB No. 39 of 2025.
6. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
Author Bio
