Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s Sasmita Singh, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack against the Additional CT & GST Officer, Bhubaneswar-III Circle, and another, concerning the revocation of cancellation of her GST registration under the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules. The matter was taken up through hybrid mode. On an advance notice, the Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Department indicated to the Court that provided the petitioner complied with all requirements of paying the taxes, interest, late fee and penalty due, the GSTR-3B return filed by the petitioner would be accepted by the Department, subject to the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules being condoned. The order is brief and does not detail the original grounds of cancellation, being confined to recording this consensual resolution reached between the parties at the hearing. Such disposals are typical in cases where a registered person's GST registration has been cancelled, often for non-filing of returns, and the taxpayer subsequently seeks revocation after the statutory limitation period for filing a revocation application under Rule 23 has expired, requiring the Court's intervention to condone the delay so that the ordinary departmental process can resume.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the delay in the petitioner invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules for revocation of cancellation of registration could be condoned.
  2. Whether the petitioner's GST returns could be accepted and the registration restored subject to compliance with outstanding tax, interest, late fee and penalty.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner sought condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules for revocation of the cancellation of her GST registration.
  • The petitioner was willing to comply with all requirements of paying the taxes, interest, late fee and penalty due in order to have her GSTR-3B return accepted and registration restored.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Department stated that, provided the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules was condoned and the petitioner complied with all requirements of paying the taxes, interest, late fee and penalty due, the GSTR-3B return filed by the petitioner would be accepted.

Court Order/Findings

  • Recording the Department's stated position, the Court condoned the delay in the petitioner invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules.
  • The Court directed that, subject to the petitioner depositing all taxes, interest, late fee and penalty due and complying with other formalities, the petitioner's application for revocation of cancellation would be considered in accordance with law.
  • A copy of the order was to be produced before the proper officer, who would open the portal to enable the petitioner to file the GST return upon compliance with the stated conditions.
  • The writ petition was disposed of in these terms, without adjudicating any contested question of law or fact.

Important Clarification

Where the Department itself does not oppose restoration of a cancelled GST registration and is agreeable to condoning delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules, the High Court will readily record such consent and direct restoration conditional upon the taxpayer clearing all outstanding tax, interest, late fee and penalty dues, without the need for adversarial adjudication. Such consensual orders illustrate a pragmatic, business-friendly approach that avoids protracted litigation over registration cancellations that primarily arise from procedural lapses, such as non-filing of returns, rather than substantive tax evasion.

Sections Involved

  • Rule 23 and its proviso under the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 – revocation of cancellation of registration.
  • Form GSTR-3B under the CGST Rules, 2017 – monthly summary return.

Decision – In Favour of

The outcome is a consent-based, procedural resolution rather than a merits victory for either side. It favours the Assessee to the extent that the delay was condoned and a path to restoration of registration was directed, but restoration remains conditional on the petitioner fully discharging the outstanding tax, interest, late fee and penalty dues.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack
  • Case No.: W.P.(C) No.39273 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Acting Chief Justice Dr. B.R. Sarangi and Justice Murahari Sri Raman
  • Decision Date: 07 December 2023
  • Disposal Nature: Writ petition disposed of

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (PDF)

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.