Orissa HC Condones Delay in GST Registration Revocation application

Ram Chandra Hansdah Vs Principal Commissioner (Orissa High Court)

In the case of Ram Chandra Hansdah vs. Principal Commissioner, the petitioner challenged the cancellation of his GST registration under the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The show cause notice was issued on 23rd December 2022, and the cancellation order was made on 13th January 2023. The petitioner sought condonation of the delay in applying for the revocation of this cancellation. His counsel assured the court that the petitioner was prepared to settle all outstanding dues, including taxes, interest, late fees, and penalties, in order to comply with the necessary formalities to have his GST registration reinstated.

The court referred to a previous judgment in the case of M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, where a similar issue of delayed application for revocation had been addressed. In that case, the court had allowed the delay to be condoned, provided the petitioner deposited all due amounts. The court applied the same reasoning in this case and directed that the petitioner’s application for revocation of his GST registration be considered, subject to the payment of all outstanding dues. The writ petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner, reinforcing the principle of allowing relief when the taxpayer demonstrates willingness to fulfill all obligations.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ORISSA HIGH COURT

1. Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 23^rd December, 2022 followed by order dated 13^th January, 2023 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 16^th November, 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. 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.