Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9696 (UTT)

AKSHAY NAINWAL v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMB/619/2026 · 2026-08-04

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010136822026 2026:UHC:6792-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY 04th August, 2026 WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO.619 of 2026 Akshay Nainwal ------Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ----Respondents Presence:- Mr. Ashutosh Posti and Ms. Aananya Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Pooja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.) 1. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 18.01.2025 passed by respondents cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner-firm on the ground that the petitioner has failed to file the returns within the prescribed period. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical facts and circumstances in WPMB No. 39 of 2025, a Coordinate Bench has permitted the petitioner therein to file an 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 the 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.” 1 UKHC010136822026 2026:UHC:6792-DB 3. It is urged that similar liberty may be granted to the petitioner. 4. Ms. Puja Banga, learned counsel for the respondents, has no objection in case the present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms. 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: 04.08.2026 KKS/PP 2