Case Law Details
Varsha Ritu Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)
In the wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained for the safety of all concerned.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner-firm was registered with effect from 31.03.2018 as regular dealer under the GST Act.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner thereafter filed an application for cancellation of registration on 28.04.2018 and simultaneously he applied for registration as a composite dealer.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the regular registration was cancelled vide order dated 11.06.2018 (Annex.4) with effect 31.03.2018 and, thus, as per law the respondents were free to grant composite registration.
Counsel for the petitioner further pointed out that instead of giving composite registration, they have given registration to petitioner as regular dealer vide order dated 09.06.2018 (Annex. 1) and now even the regular registration is being cancelled vide order dated 30.09.2021 (Annex. 7)
Counsel for the respondents made a limited submission that consideration for regular composite registration could not have happened earlier because the petitioner was already registration as a regular dealer.
In light of aforesaid submission the ‘writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents that they will reconsider registration of the petitioner as composite dealer w.e.f. 31.3.2018 while keeping into consideration the fact that the respondents themselves cancelled the registration as regular dealer w.e.f. 31.03.2018 vide order dated 11.06.2018 (Annex.4). Necessary order shall be passed by the respondents within a period of 60 days from today w.e.f. date on which petitioner had originally applied for composite registration, strictly in accordance with law.
The second stay petition and the main stay petition both are disposed of accordingly.
Author Bio
