M/S R K CONTRACTORS THROUGH ITS PROP. v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Court: High Court of Uttarakhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. NARENDAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Uttarakhand judgment dated 2025-08-04. M/S R K CONTRACTORS THROUGH ITS PROP. v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. ALOK MAHRA Writ Petition (M/B) No. 599 of 2025 th 4 August, 2025 M/s R. K. Contractors --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Others --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Eshan Sachdev, learned counsel for the petitioner through V. C. Ms. Pooja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Mr. G. Narendar, C. J. ) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State Ms. Pooja Banga. 2. The short question involved in this writ petition is correctness of the cancellation of the GST registration. 3.
After hearing for some time, learned Brief Holder for the State submits that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under the provisions of Section 30 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), wherein the registered dealer, who has suffered an order of cancellation of the registration, is entitled to make an application under the provisions of Section 30 of the Act to revoke the orders of cancellation of registration. 4. On a query, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that no such application has been preferred by the petitioner. 5. It is seen that the application is required to be made within 90 days. 6.
In view of the enforcement of the Act being at the initial stage and various typical aspects of the Act being a little beyond the understanding of a common man, whose prime focus is on running his day to day business, we feel that the limitation should not take precedence for reconsideration of the order of cancellation. The cancellation directly affects the livelihood of the citizen and every cancellation would also have an adverse effect on the revenues of the State, as it is well known that no person can carry-on trade or business as guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, without complying with the restriction of registration. 7. In that view, keeping a larger objective of the involvement of livelihood and also loss of revenue to the Department, we are of the considered opinion that delay in invoking the provisions of Section 30 of the Act is required to be condoned and is, accordingly, condoned.
If an application is made by the petitioner under the provisions of Section 30 of the Act within three weeks from today and if such an application is made, the same shall be taken-up for consideration and shall be disposed of within three weeks thereafter. Along with the application, the petitioner shall also file the returns upto the date of cancellation order. 8. The order in appeal dated 23. 12. 2024 is set aside. 9. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. 10. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (G. NARENDAR, C. J. ) (ALOK MAHRA, J. ) Dated: 04. 08. 2025 BS
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.