WPMS No.2619 of 2023

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a partnership firm carrying on business as M/S Shyam Narayan Prasad and registered under the CGST Act, 2017, had its registration cancelled by order dated 15.03.2023 for failure to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months. The petitioner's case was that its appointed GST consultant/advocate had failed to inform it of the liability to file returns during that period, resulting in the default without the petitioner's own knowledge or wilful non-compliance. By the time the petitioner became aware of the cancellation and its consequences, the returns and associated dues had accumulated. The petitioner approached the Uttarakhand High Court, having already paid the tax and penalty imposed, seeking relief comparable to that granted by a coordinate bench in an earlier, similar matter involving another firm facing the same consultant-related default.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns, attributed to a consultant's default, could be addressed through the statutory revocation mechanism.
  2. What conditions should attach to permitting a fresh revocation application in such circumstances.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the default in filing returns arose from the GST consultant's failure to inform the petitioner of its filing obligations, and that the petitioner had already paid the tax and penalty imposed.
  • It was submitted that the present petition may be decided in terms of the order passed by a coordinate bench on 02.03.2023 in a similar matter, M/S Battu Lal Radhay Shyam v. Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax Commissionerate.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State's counsel agreed that the present petition could be decided on the same terms as the earlier coordinate-bench decision addressing a similar controversy.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court disposed of the petition in terms of its earlier order dated 02.03.2023 in the first petition, without independently re-examining the merits, given the parties' agreement.
  • The petitioner was permitted to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30 of the CGST Act read with the CGST Rules, within two weeks, subject to complying with all conditions of Section 30, submitting all previously unfiled returns, and depositing all pending dues.
  • If such an application was filed within the stipulated period, the competent authority was directed to consider it within the following two weeks. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

Important Clarification

  • Where a registration is cancelled for continuous non-filing of returns attributable to a consultant's lapse rather than deliberate default, courts are willing to open a fresh, time-bound window for a revocation application under Section 30, provided the taxpayer fully regularises pending compliance.
  • Such relief is conditional on strict compliance — filing all pending returns and clearing dues — within the court-fixed timeline, failing which the cancellation stands, underscoring that the remedy is procedural accommodation rather than a substantive finding that the cancellation itself was wrongful.
  • Courts frequently follow their own coordinate-bench precedents in materially identical fact patterns involving return-filing defaults, promoting consistency in how such consultant-related lapses are addressed across similarly placed taxpayers.

Sections Involved

  • Section 30, CGST Act, 2017 — provides for revocation of cancellation of registration on an application made within the prescribed conditions.
  • CGST Rules, 2017 — prescribe the procedural requirements for a revocation application under Section 30.

Decision – In Favour of

The decision is in favour of the assessee, permitting a fresh revocation application under Section 30, subject to full compliance with pending returns and dues within the timeline fixed.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital
Case Number: WPMS No.2619 of 2023
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Maithani
Date of Order: 19.09.2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.