Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5315 (UTT)

MS BHAGWATI ENTERPRISES v. COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX

WPMB/376/2026 · 2026-05-18

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:3798-DB I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE SUBHASH UPADHYAY W RI T PETI TI ON ( M/ B) NO. 3 7 6 OF 2 0 2 6 1 8 TH MAY, 2 0 2 6 M/ s Bhagwati Enterprises …… Petitioner Versus Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax and another …… Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Tarun Pande, learned counsel Counsel for the respondents : Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel for the respondents / CGST Th e Cou r t m ade t h e follow in g: JUDGMENT: ( per Sr i Man oj Ku m ar Gu pt a, C.J.) 1) The petitioner has assailed the order dated 18.12.2025 cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner firm on the ground that it had failed to file the returns within prescribed period. 1 2026:UHC:3798-DB 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical facts and circumstances in WPMB No. 39 of 2025 a Co-ordinate Bench has permitted the petitioner therein to file application for revocation of the cancellation order and subject to deposit of unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the competent authority has been directed to decide the application for revocation of the cancellation order. The operative part of the order passed in said writ petition is as follows : “8. Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of by permitting petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If he makes such application within two weeks from today and also furnishes all the pending returns and deposits unpaid tax along with interest and amount of penalty, the Competent Authority shall consider the petitioner’s prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of such application.” 3) It is urged that similar liberty may be granted to the petitioner. 4) Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel appearing for the respondents / CGST has no objection in case the present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms. 2 2026:UHC:3798-DB 5) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as WPMB No. 39 of 2025. 6) Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. _______________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 18TH MAY, 2026 Negi 3 HIMANS HU NEGI Digitally signed by HIMANSHU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13 aaf116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90 d5757, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990F C51A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF 7C18DB2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2026.05.18 17:12:19 +05'30'