MS ROYAL CONSTRUCTION v. COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
WPMB/377/2026 · 2026-05-14
Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5430 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5430 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:3723-DB HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE SUBHASH UPADHYAY 1 4 TH MAY, 2 0 2 6 W RI T PETI TI ON ( M/ B) NO. 37 7 OF 2 0 2 6 M/ s Royal Construction
…...Petitioner. Ver su s Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax & another
….Respondents.
Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel. Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel.
JUDGMENT :(per Mr . Man oj Kum ar Gu pt a, C.J.)
1.
The petitioner has assailed the order dated 10.10.2025 cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner firm on the ground that it had failed to file the returns within prescribed period.
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 DB
order. The operative part of the order passed in the said writ petition is as follows: -
“8. Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of by permitting petitioner to move an application for 1
2026:UHC:3723-DB 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.
Learned counsel for the respondents/ CGST on whom notice of the instant writ petition was served initially, in order to assist the Court, states that the controversy is covered by the order passed in the afore-said case.
5.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as WPMB No.39 of 2025.
6.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dated: 14th May, 2026 NI SHANT 2 NISHANT KUMAR Digitally signed by NISHANT KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=ad3fcb5ca64340f5dd0a4c574afa0fd63133605ca57cdc00ec2b7462b452b326, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=7E81318F3B1BE7EAAC9370185F7C9C20892BC63A055CFD1961690560 487E670C, cn=NISHANT KUMAR Date: 2026.05.15 11:23:22 +05'30'