Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Jatadhari Sahoo, had his GST registration cancelled by order dated 19th September 2022, pursuant to a show cause notice dated 19th August 2022, under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner did not seek revocation within the statutorily prescribed period but subsequently expressed readiness and willingness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, late fee, penalty and other dues so that the department would accept the pending return. The petitioner approached the Orissa High Court under Article 226, seeking condonation of the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules for revocation of the cancellation, relying on an identical relief already granted by a coordinate Bench in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules seeking revocation of cancellation of GST registration can be condoned by the writ court.
  2. What conditions should attach to such condonation to safeguard revenue interest.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner was ready and willing to deposit all tax, interest, late fee, penalty and other dues required for the return to be accepted by the department.
  • An identical claim for condonation of delay in a coordinate Bench decision, Mohanty Enterprises, had already been allowed on similar facts and should govern this case as well.
  • Continued cancellation causes disproportionate hardship to a taxpayer willing to fully comply going forward.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Additional Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Department appeared but raised no distinguishing objection to the applicability of the Mohanty Enterprises precedent to the petitioner's facts.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court reproduced the operative direction from Mohanty Enterprises, which had condoned the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 subject to the petitioner depositing all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty and other dues and complying with other formalities.
  • Following the same reasoning, the Court condoned the delay in the petitioner's case as well and directed that the revocation application be considered in accordance with law upon compliance with the deposit conditions, observing that the petitioner gets the relief "in the interest of revenue."
  • The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, without further contest.

Important Clarification

  • Orissa High Court has adopted a consistent practice of condoning delay in seeking revocation of GST registration cancellation where the taxpayer undertakes to clear all outstanding tax, interest, late fee and penalty and comply with other formalities.
  • Such relief is granted "in the interest of revenue," recognising that restoring a compliant taxpayer to the GST fold benefits collections more than leaving a business permanently deregistered over a procedural delay in filing the revocation application.

Sections Involved

  • Rule 23, CGST/OGST Rules, 2017 – procedure and proviso for revocation of cancellation of registration, including condonation of delay.
  • Section 29, CGST Act, 2017 – cancellation of registration, the substantive provision underlying the impugned order.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the assessee — delay condoned and revocation application directed to be considered on merits upon deposit of dues.

Case Details

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.13938 of 2025; Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice (Harish Tandon) and Hon'ble Mr Justice Murahari Sri Raman; Date: 19.06.2025.

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.