Case Law Details
Oneshwar Construction Vs State Tax Officer and Another (Uttarakhand High Court)
Oneshwar Construction filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution before the Uttarakhand High Court, challenging the order dated February 5, 2024, which revoked its GST registration. The petitioner sought a certiorari writ to quash the impugned order and a mandamus writ directing the authorities to reinstate its GST registration (GSTIN 05AAEFO1975E1ZE). Additionally, the petitioner requested further relief as deemed appropriate by the court and reimbursement of legal costs.
During the proceedings, the petitioner, through counsel, expressed willingness to clear all outstanding tax dues, including interest and penalties. The State Tax Officer requested one week from the ap-plication’s submission date to review and decide the matter. With mutual consent from both parties, the court ruled that if the petitioner deposited the full dues and submitted an application within one week, the tax authorities must process the request and issue a decision within another week. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
The present Writ Pet it ion has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers: –
“ (I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 5- 2- 2024 passed by respondent no. 1 ( Annexure No. 3 to this writ petition).
(II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandam us, com-manding/ directing the respondents to revive the GST registration certificate of the petitioner bearing GSTI N No. 05AAEFO1975E1ZE.
(III) Pass such other or further orders in favour of petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court m ay deem , fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(IV) Award the cost of writ petition in favour of petitioner”
2. Heard Mr. Sagar Kothari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Suyash Pant , learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
3. Mr. Sagar Kothari, learned counsel for the petitioner has inform0ed on instructions that the petitioner is willing to deposit all the outstanding dues of tax including interest and penalty, if any, and for the said purpose, the petitioner shall move an application before the State Tax Officer, Rishikesh, Sector- 1, Goods and Services Tax within a week from today.
4. Mr. Suyash Pant , learned Standing Counsel has requested one week’s time from the date of submission of the application to decide the same.
5. With the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner deposits entire outstanding dues of tax including interest and penalty, if any, and submits it s application within one week from today, the State Tax Officer, Rishikesh, Sector- 1, Goods and Services Tax shall consider the same and pass an appropriate order as per law within a period of one week from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with the application.
Author Bio
