RAM CHANDRA HANSDAH v. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, BBSR
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2024-12-05. RAM CHANDRA HANSDAH v. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, BBSR. Read the judgment and case...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W. P. (C) No. 29925 of 2024 Ram Chandra Hansdah …. Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. S. A. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- Principal Commissioner, CGST …. Opposite Parties and Central Excise, Bhubaneswar and another Represented By Adv. – Mr. A. Kedia, Jr. Standing Counsel CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. S. SAHOO ORDER 05. 12. 2024 Order No. 01. 1. Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner rd and submits, under challenge is show cause notice dated 23 th December, 2022 followed by order dated 13 January, 2023 cancelling his client’s registration under Odisha 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 th order dated 16 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 // 2 // claim to relief including prayer for condonation of delay is covered by said order. 2. Mr. Kedia, learned advocate, Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the department. 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. (Arindam Sinha) Judge (M. S.
Sahoo) Signature Not Verified Judge Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOTIPRAVA BHOL Jyoti Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 05-Dec-2024 14:49:31
Source: High Court of Orissa. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.