https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432015 Cancellation of GST registration was treated as causing business hardship and affecting livelihood, so the HC allowed revocation proceedings to be pursued despite the application being time-barred. The statutory remedy under Section 30 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 read with Rule 23 of the Rules remained available, but the petitioner was required to file the revocation application within 21 days and comply with return-filing obligations for the defaulted period and subsequent completed months. The revenue was directed to consider the matter liberally and decide it expeditiously if dues were identified and paid. en-us Mon, 12 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Apr 2025 13:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432015 Cancellation of GST registration was treated as causing business hardship and affecting livelihood, so the HC allowed revocation proceedings to be pursued despite the application being time-barred. The statutory remedy under Section 30 of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 read with Rule 23 of the Rules remained available, but the petitioner was required to file the revocation application within 21 days and comply with return-filing obligations for the defaulted period and subsequent completed months. The revenue was directed to consider the matter liberally and decide it expeditiously if dues were identified and paid. Case-Laws GST Mon, 12 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432015