Case Law Details
Prafulla Mahakud Vs Addl. Commissioner of GST (Appeals) (Orissa High Court)
The Orissa High Court addressed a petition challenging the cancellation of GST registration by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Bhubaneswar. The petitioner, Prafulla Mahakud, sought relief by committing to pay all outstanding tax liabilities, including interest, late fees, and penalties, to enable the acceptance of pending returns. The petitioner relied on a previous court ruling in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, which allowed revocation of registration cancellation upon full payment of dues. The petitioner requested a similar direction, including condonation of delay in applying for revocation.
The court, taking note of the precedent set in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, granted relief under the same principles. The delay in applying for revocation was condoned, and the petitioner was allowed to apply for restoration of GST registration, subject to compliance with all statutory payment requirements. The department was directed to consider the revocation request in accordance with the law. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, ensuring the petitioner’s opportunity to restore their GST registration while securing revenue interests.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ORISSA HIGH COURT
1. Mr. Jena, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is the appeal order dated 19th November, 2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal), Bhubaneswar by confirming cancellation of registration under Central 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 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. Satapathy, learned advocate, Senior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the department. We notice he had appeared in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (supra).
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.
Author Bio
