Disposed¶21

Bimal Kumar Kar v. Assistant Commisoner of State Tax, Dhenkanal

Orissa HC8 Aug 2025WP(C)/21176/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: GST registration cancellation; revocation application; proviso to Rule 23 OGST Rules; condonation of delay; Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; deposit of tax, interest, late fee, penalty; acceptance of return form; M/s. Mohanty Enterprises W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (order dated 16.11.2022); coordinate Bench reliance; Assistant Commissioner of State Tax Dhenkanal Circle, Odisha; Orissa High Court at Cuttack; writ petition disposed on 08.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules; subject to deposit of all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. due and compliance with other formalities, the petitioner's application for revocation of the cancelled GST registration is to be considered in accordance with law. ¶21

Bimal Kumar Kar Vs Assistant Commisoner of State Tax… — GST and Indirect Tax | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's claim to relief, including condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules for revocation of his GST registration cancelled on 3rd July, 2024, is covered by the coordinate Bench order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, subject to payment of tax, interest, late fee and penalty.

¶15

Court's answer

The direction made in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises is made likewise in this writ petition: the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules is condoned, and subject to the petitioner depositing all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. due and complying with other formalities, the application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law; the petitioner gets the relief in the interest of revenue.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.(C) No.21176 of 2025, Bimal Kumar Kar v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Dhenkanal Circle, Odisha) before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Harish Tandon, and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Murahari Sri Raman), disposed of on 08.08.2025. The petitioner's registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 had been cancelled by order dated 3rd July, 2024, following show cause notice dated 27th March, 2024. Relying on the coordinate Bench order dated 16th November, 2022 in W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others), the Court reproduced paragraph-2 of that order and made the like direction in this writ petition: the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned, and subject to the petitioner depositing all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. due and complying with other formalities, the application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law; relief granted in the interest of revenue.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.21176 of 2025

¶2

Bimal Kumar Kar

¶3

…. Petitioner Ms.Upasana Bal, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

…. Assistant Commissioner of State Opposite Party Tax Dhenkanal Circle, Odisha

¶6

Mr.S.Das, ASC (C.T. & GST)

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶9

AND

¶10

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

08.08.2025

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

2. Ms.Bal, learned Advocate appears on behalf of the petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 27^th March, 2024 followed by order dated 3^rd July, 2024 cancelling his client's registration under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. She submits, her client is ready and willing to pay the tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other sum required to be paid for the return form of her client to be accepted by the Department. He relies on order dated 16^th November, 2022 of coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 ( M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others ). She submits, her client's claim to relief including prayer for condonation of delay is covered by said order.

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

3. Mr. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Opposite Party-Department.

¶18

4. We reproduce below paragraph-2 from said order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (supra);

¶19

"2. In that view of the matter, 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.”

¶20

Likewise, direction is made in this writ petition. Petitioner gets the relief in the interest of revenue.

¶21

5. The writ petition is disposed of.

¶22

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

¶23

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶24

Bichi

¶25

Signature Not Verified