Narayan Singh Patni Contractor Vs Commissioner (Uttarakhand High Court)
In the case of Narayan Singh Patni Contractor vs. Commissioner, the Uttarakhand High Court addressed the issue of whether a cancelled Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration can be reinstated if the assessee agrees to pay all outstanding dues. The petitioner, whose GST registration was cancelled, approached the court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking quashing of the cancellation order and permission to apply for revocation under Section 30 of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017.
The petitioner expressed readiness to pay the total outstanding liability, including tax, interest, and penalty, within a two-week period. The court acknowledged this intent and took a pragmatic approach, allowing the petitioner to file the revocation application. It directed the Competent Authority to consider the application and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law within two weeks of submission. The court emphasized that its order was procedural and did not comment on the merits of the case.
The court’s decision aligns with Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the corresponding state law in Uttarakhand. This provision allows for revocation of cancellation if certain conditions, including timely payment of dues, are met. The ruling underscores that payment compliance can act as a valid ground for reinstating a GST registration, and also highlights the importance of procedural fairness in tax administration.
