Manisha Pattnaik Vs Principal Commissioner of Central… — GST and Indirect Tax | Orissa HC (2026)

Manisha Pattnaik Vs Principal Commissioner of Central… — GST and Indirect Tax | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules; subject to depositing all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. and complying with other formalities, the petitioner's application for revocation to be considered in accordance with law (same direction as in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises), granted in the interest of revenue.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose GST registration was cancelled, is entitled to have the return form accepted by the department upon payment of tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other sum required to be paid. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Adopting paragraph-2 of the coordinate Bench order in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises, 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 the petitioner depositing all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. and complying with other formalities, the petitioner's application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law; the petitioner gets this relief in the interest of revenue.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Harish Tandon, Chief Justice and Murahari Sri Raman, Judge), by order dated 05.02.2026, disposed of W.P.(C) No. 3518 of 2026 (Manisha Pattnaik v. Principal Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Bhubaneswar and others), challenging a show cause notice dated 6th February, 2024 and the order dated 11th March, 2024 cancelling the petitioner's registration under the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the client was willing to pay tax, interest, late fee, penalty and other sums so that the return form would be accepted, and that the claim, including prayer for condonation of delay, was covered by the coordinate Bench order dated 16th November, 2022 in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha (W.P.(C) no.30374 of 2022). Reproducing paragraph-2 of that order, the Court made a like direction: delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules condoned, and subject to deposit of all taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. and compliance with other formalities, the revocation application to be considered in accordance with law, relief being granted in the interest of revenue.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 3518 of 2026

Manisha Pattnaik

…. Petitioner

Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate

-versus-

…. Principal Commissioner of Central Opposite Parties Goods and Service Tax, Bhubaneswar and others

Mr. S.K. Roy Choudhury, Senior Standing Counsel

CORAM:

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

HON’BLE MR JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Order No.

01 .

ORDER 05.02.2026

1. Mr. S.K. Dash, learned counsel appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 6^th February, 2024 followed by order dated 11^th March, 2024 cancelling his client’s registration under State 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.

2 . Mr. S.K. Roy Choudhury, learned Senior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the opposite parties-Department.

Page 1 of 2

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

" 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."

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

4. The writ petition is disposed of.

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman)

Judge

S.K. Jena/ Sisira

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIRA KUMAR BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 11-Feb-2026 14:13:32

Signature Not Verified

Page 2 of 2