9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (1) TMI 1072 - HC - GSTChallenge to SCN - Cancellation of client s registration under Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 - petitioner is ready and willing to pay the tax interest late fee penalty and any other sum required to be paid for the return form - HELD THAT - Reliance placed in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises 2022 (11) TMI 1521 - ORISSA HIGH COURT where it was held that the delay in Petitioner s invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned and it is directed that subject to the Petitioner depositing all the taxes interest late fee penalty etc. due and complying with other formalities the Petitioner s application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law. Petition disposed off.
Summary:
In the case before the Orissa High Court, presided by Justices Arindam Sinha and M.S. Sahoo, the petitioner challenged a show cause notice dated August 8, 2023, and a subsequent order dated December 12, 2023, which canceled the petitioner's registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Represented by Advocate Ms. I. Tripathy, the petitioner expressed willingness to pay all dues including tax, interest, late fees, and penalties to have their return form accepted. The petitioner relied on a precedent set by a coordinate bench in the case of *M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others* (W.P.(C) no.30374 of 2022), where delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules was condoned. The court, with Mr. A. Kedia appearing for the department, noted the similarity to the *M/s. Mohanty Enterprises* case, quoting from it: "the delay in Petitioner's invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned and it is directed that subject to the Petitioner depositing all the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc., due and complying with other formalities, the Petitioner's application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law." Following this precedent, the court granted similar relief to the petitioner, emphasizing that the action was in the interest of revenue. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
|
