Disposed¶20

M/S.Ratna Vegetable and Co.,Baragarh v. the Commissioner Commercial Tax(C.T.) and Goods and Services Tax(G.S.T), Cuttack

Orissa HC24 Feb 2026WP(C)/5404/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST registration cancellation; revocation application; proviso to Rule 23 Odisha GST Rules; condonation of delay; deposit of tax, interest, late fee, penalty; return acceptance; Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act 2017; coordinate Bench precedent M/s. Mohanty Enterprises W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022; writ petition disposed; interest of revenue.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 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, enabling acceptance of the petitioner's return. ¶20

M/S.Ratna Vegetable and Co.,Baragarh Vs the Commissioner… — GST and Indirect Tax | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose registration under the Odisha GST Act, 2017 was cancelled, may be granted relief — including condonation of delay in invoking the proviso to Rule 23 OGST Rules — on his undertaking to pay tax, interest, late fee, penalty and other sums so that his return is accepted and his application for revocation is considered.

¶13

Court's answer

Adopting the direction of the coordinate Bench in M/s. Mohanty Enterprises (W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022), this court condones the delay in the petitioner invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the OGST Rules and directs that, subject to the petitioner depositing all 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; the petitioner gets the relief in the interest of revenue.

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, WP(C) No.5404 of 2026 (Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice M.S. Raman), order dated 24.02.2026: The petitioner's registration under the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 had been cancelled by order dated 11.03.2024 following a show cause notice dated 06.02.2024. Counsel submitted the petitioner was ready to pay tax, interest, late fee, penalty and other sums and relied on a coordinate Bench order dated 16.11.2022 in W.P.(C) No.30374 of 2022 (M/s. Mohanty Enterprises v. The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha). Reproducing paragraph-2 of that order, the Bench made a like direction: 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. and compliance with formalities, the application for revocation is to be considered in accordance with law. Writ petition disposed of, relief granted in the interest of revenue.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.5404 of 2026

¶2

M/s. Ratna Vegetable and Co … Petitioner

¶3

Mr. Abhilash Mishra, Advocate

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

The Commissioner Commercial Tax … Opposite Parties (C.T.) and Goods and Services Tax (G.S.T.) and another

¶6

Mr. Sourav Tibrewal, Additional Standing Counsel

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

Order No.

24.02.2026

01. 1 . Learned advocate 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 Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He submits that the 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 of his client to be accepted by the Department. He relies on order dated 16^th November, 2022 of coordinate Bench in

¶14

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.

¶15

2. Mr. Sourav Tibrewal, learned Additional Standing Counsel for State Revenue.

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

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

¶18

"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."

¶19

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

¶20

4. The writ petition is disposed of.

¶21

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

¶22

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶23

MRS/Laxmikant

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 24-Feb-2026 11:27:21

¶26

Page 2 of 2

M/S.Ratna Vegetable and Co.,Baragarh v. the Commissioner Commercial Tax(C.T.) and Goods and Services Tax(G.S.T), Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Ratna Vegetable and Co.,Baragarh v. the Commissioner Commercial Tax(C.T.) and Goods and Services Tax(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

Minati Jayasingh Vs State of Odisha

Shree Venketesh Construction and Co.,Sambalpur Vs Union of India

Shashikanta Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Vedanta Limited, Jharsuguda Vs Union of India

M/S. Sanjay Kumar Bijay Kumar, Adaspur, Cuttack Vs Principal Commisssioner of Income TAX-1, Bbsr

M/S Ananta Charan Biswal, Managobindapur Vs the Chief Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Goods and Services Tax, Cuttack