2022 (10) TMI 1067

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uashing the Order-in-Appeal No.: MYS-SPP-ADC/Jc(A)-001 to 010-2022-23 GST dated 22.04.2022 passed by Respondent No.1. vide Annexure-F. (ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/direction to Respondent No.2 and / or Respondent No.3 to restore the GST Registration of the Petitioner; (iii) Grant ad-interim relief as prayed for herein below; (iv) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the cases in the interest of justice." 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the Memorandum of Petition and r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... DEEPAK VASUDE ASRANI CHUGH HUF V/S JOINT COMMISSIONER OF GST APPEALS -II, BANGALORE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX RANGE AND -4, BENGALURU REPORTED IN 2022 (9) TMI 479 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 2. AARCITY BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, M/S.NAND SPARK SHINE COMNPANY, M/S. VSL SECURITY SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND ORION AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD. V/S UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS, STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS REPORTED IN 2021 (12) TMI 890 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT 3. UCHIT N SHETH FOR THE PETITIONER V/S MR PRIYANK LIDHA FOR THE RESPONDENT REPORTED IN 2022 (4) TMI 751 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT 4. M/S. NEO BUILT THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR V/S ETOCUM-PROPER OFFICER AND ANOTHER REPORTED IN 2022 (6) TMI 463 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT 5. In....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erial on record and specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that it was not possible for him to seek revocation of the cancellation order on account of the covid 19 pandemic and till disposal of the appeal by respondent No.1-Appellate Authority, the said explanation offered by the petitioner in not seeking revocation of the cancellation within a stipulated period of 30 days under Section 30 of the CGST Act is to be held as valid and proper and respondent No.2 is to be directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for revocation of the cancellation order in accordance with law subject to payment of outstanding due taxes by the petitioner in accordance with law. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i) Petition ....