The Uttarakhand High Court reiterates, following its recent precedent, that businesses whose GST registration was cancelled can seek revocation by agreeing to pay all pending tax, interest, and late fee, and that applications for revocation must be duly considered. This holding reaffirms existing precedent set by the same court and serves as binding authority for subordinate courts in Uttarakhand handling GST cancellation disputes.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPMB/880/2025 of MS UMESH CHANDRA GSTIN Vs COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COMMISSIONERATE |
| CNR | UKHC010163912025 |
| Date of Registration | 14-10-2025 |
| Decision Date | 28-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDRA MAITHANI, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA |
| Court | High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Bench | Division Bench: Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. & Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts in Uttarakhand |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms prior precedent of this court |
| Type of Law | Taxation / GST Law |
| Questions of Law | Whether GST registration cancellation can be quashed when the petitioner offers to clear all dues and seeks revocation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017. |
| Ratio Decidendi | The High Court, following its prior Division Bench judgment, held that where a petitioner whose GST registration has been cancelled undertakes to pay all balance tax, interest, and late fee, the cancellation order ought to be set aside or reconsidered. The petitioner must be permitted to file an application for revocation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017, and the authorities are to consider such application afresh in accordance with law. This approach was previously laid down by the court in Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd Vs. Dinesh Chandra Gururani, and was deemed squarely applicable here by consent of both parties. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd Vs. Dinesh Chandra Gururani, WPSB No.39 of 2025 (Uttarakhand High Court) |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Reliance on previous Division Bench judgment of the same court; acceptance of admitted legal position by both sides. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled by order dated 18.04.2020. Petitioner expressed willingness to pay all balance tax, interest, and late fee, and sought permission to apply for revocation of cancellation in terms of Section 30 of the Act. Both parties agreed that the issue is covered by the earlier decision in Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd case. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and GST authorities in Uttarakhand |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and the Supreme Court in GST registration revocation matters |
| Follows | Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd Vs. Dinesh Chandra Gururani, WPSB No.39 of 2025 (Uttarakhand High Court) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The court reaffirmed that GST registration cancellation can be set aside if the registered person undertakes to clear all outstanding dues (tax, interest, late fees).
- Taxpayers must be granted an opportunity to apply for revocation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017, following cancellation orders.
- Both Revenue and taxpayers accepted that the earlier ruling of the court governs such situations, enhancing procedural clarity and predictability.
- Lawyers may invoke this precedent in similar matters where GST registration cancellation is challenged and settlement of dues is offered.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted at the outset that the legal controversy is squarely covered by its earlier Division Bench judgment dated 24.02.2025 in Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd Vs. Dinesh Chandra Gururani.
- The State counsel expressly admitted this legal position.
- The reasoning of the precedent, as applied, is that where a GST registration cancellation is challenged, and the taxpayer is ready to pay the statutory dues, the petitioner should be allowed to file for revocation under Section 30 of the Act. The concerned authorities are required to decide such applications as per law.
- By directly following and applying the earlier judgment without further independent analysis, the court ensured consistency with its own prior precedent.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought quashing of the GST registration cancellation on the ground of willingness to pay all outstanding tax, interest, and late fee.
- Requested permission to seek revocation of cancellation in accordance with Section 30 of UKGST/CGST Act, 2017.
Respondent (State/GST Authority)
- Admitted that the issue is squarely covered by the previous Division Bench judgment of the court in Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd.
- Did not oppose the grant of relief sought by the petitioner in light of the earlier precedent.
Factual Background
The petition arose from the cancellation of the petitioner’s GST registration by an order dated 18.04.2020. The petitioner expressed readiness to pay all balance tax, interest, and late fee, and approached the court seeking quashing of the cancellation order and permission to file for revocation under Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017. The controversy was admitted by both sides to be governed by a recent Division Bench ruling of the court.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act, 2017 was the statutory provision at issue, which provides for the revocation of cancellation of GST registration.
- The judgment explicitly provides that petitioners whose registrations have been cancelled must be allowed to file applications under Section 30 if they agree to pay all dues, and such applications must be considered in accordance with law.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded in the judgment. Both judges issued a unanimous order.
Procedural Innovations
No new procedural innovations are detailed in the judgment; the order follows and applies extant precedent.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Judgment follows and reaffirms an existing Division Bench precedent of the Uttarakhand High Court regarding revocation of GST registration cancellation.