Disposed¶19

Sudarsan Biswal v. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and G.S.T, Cuttack

Orissa HC6 Jul 2026WP(C)/19644/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST registration cancellation and revocation; condonation of delay; proviso to Rule 23 OGST Rules; Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; reliance on M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (order dated 16.11.2022); Sudarsan Biswal v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (CT) & GST, Cuttack; Odisha High Court; writ petition disposed; relief in the interest of revenue.

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. and compliance with other formalities, the petitioner's application for revocation to be considered in accordance with law (direction analogous to M/s. Mohanty Enterprises). ¶19

Sudarsan Biswal Vs the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes… — GST and Indirect Tax | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose GST registration was cancelled (show cause notice dated 7th October, 2024; order dated 11th November, 2024 under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017), is entitled to condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules and to acceptance of his returns/revocation upon payment of tax, interest, late fee, penalty and other dues, as covered by the coordinate Bench order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (supra).

¶13

Court's answer

A like direction to that in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (supra) was made 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. and complying with other formalities, his application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law; relief is granted in the interest of revenue.

¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa, W.P.(C) No.19644 of 2026 (order dated 06.07.2026; Harish Tandon, CJ and M.S. Raman, J): Petitioner challenged the cancellation of his GST registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, effected after a show cause notice dated 7th October, 2024 by order dated 11th November, 2024, and sought acceptance of his return forms upon payment of tax, interest, late fee, penalty and other dues, relying on the coordinate Bench order dated 16th November, 2022 in W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others). Reproducing paragraph-2 of that order, the Court made a like direction in this writ petition: the delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules is condoned and, subject to deposit of all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc., the petitioner's application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law; relief granted in the interest of revenue and the writ petition disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.19644 of 2026

¶3

Sudarsan Biswal …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Prabodha Chandra Nayak and Mr. S. K. Sahu, Advocates -versus…. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Opposite Parties (CT) and Goods & Service Tax (GST), Cuttack and another

¶5

Mr. Sheshadeba Das, ASC, CT & GST

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶8

HON’BLE MR JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

Order No.

01 .

06.07.2026

1. Learned counsel appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 7^th October, 2024 followed by order dated 11^th November, 2024 cancelling his client’s registration under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He submits, his 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 his 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. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others) . He submits, his client’s claim to relief including prayer for condonation of delay is covered by said order.

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

2 . Mr. Sheshadeba Das, learned ASC, CT & GST appears on behalf of the opposite parties-Department.

¶16

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

¶17

" 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."

¶18

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

¶19

4. The writ petition is disposed of.

¶20

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

¶21

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

M. Panda Digitally Signed Signed by: MRUTYUNJAYA PANDA Reason: Authenti catio n Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jul-2026 14:42:27

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Sudarsan Biswal v. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and G.S.T, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudarsan Biswal v. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and G.S.T, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Cuttack Vs Sales Tax Officer, Ct and GST Circle, Cuttack I West

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Cuttack Vs Sales Tax Officer, Ct and GST Circle, Cuttack I West

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Cuttack Vs Sales Tax Officer, Ct and GST Circle, Cuttack I West

M/S Sourat Das (Trade Name the Health Mart), Bhubaneswar Vs Superintendent of GST and Central Excise, Bhubaneswar VII Range, Bhubaneswar

Dibyasen Behera Vs the Principal Commissioner, Cgst and Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Commissionerate, Bhubaneswar

Mnicro Labs Private Ltd.,Bhubaneswar Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Bhubaneswar