Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTGST Act beyond Understanding Of Common Man: Why Uttrakhand HC Says So?

GST Act beyond Understanding Of Common Man: Why Uttrakhand HC Says So?

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Uttarakhand High Court has quashed the cancellation of GST registration of a local restaurant, observing that the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime remains “technically complex” for common citizens who are more focused on sustaining their daily business operations.

The division bench of Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Alok Mahra passed the order earlier this week in response to a petition filed by M/s River View Restaurant, located in Bageshwar district. The court permitted the restaurant to submit a fresh application for restoration of its GST registration and instructed the state GST department to process it within three weeks of filing.

Highlighting the practical difficulties faced by small businesses in navigating the GST system, the court noted, “GST is still in its nascent stage, and many of its provisions are beyond the understanding of an average person.” It emphasized that procedural delays should not override the broader implications of business continuity and revenue loss to the exchequer.

The respondent authorities — including the Commissioner and Joint Commissioner of State GST — argued that the petitioner had an opportunity to file a revocation application under Section 30 of the Central GST Act, 2017. This provision allows a taxpayer to seek revocation of a cancellation order within 30 days, extendable up to 90 days, provided all dues and returns are cleared.

However, the petitioner’s counsel acknowledged that no such application was made within the stipulated time frame.

Despite this lapse, the High Court took a sympathetic view. “We feel that the limitation should not take precedence over reconsideration of the cancellation order. Considering the larger objective involving livelihood and revenue interests, the delay in invoking the provision of the Act is required to be, and is hereby, condoned,” the bench ruled.

Case Details

Case Title: M/s River View Restaurant Versus State of Uttarakhand and others 

Case No.: WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 560 OF 2025

Date: 22/07/2025 

Counsel For  Petitioner: Yogesh Kumar Pacholia

Counsel For Respondent: Puja Banga

Read More: GST Detention Proceedings| Supreme Court Upholds Taxpayers’ Right to Appeal Despite Payment of Penalty 

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Gold Without Foreign Markings Can’t Be Confiscated on Suspicion of Smuggling: CESTAT 

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad, has set aside the...

GST Appellate Authority Can’t Send Demand Back for Document Verification: GSTAT

The GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Ernakulam Bench has held that a first appellate authority...

CENVAT Credit Can’t Be Denied When Dept. Failed To Establish Company Received Invoices Without Receiving Copper Scrap: CESTAT 

The Allahabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Disc-Brake Units Aren’t Train Protection and Warning System Equipment: CESTAT Denies Customs Concession, Limits Duty Demand

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) at New Delhi has held...

More like this

Gold Without Foreign Markings Can’t Be Confiscated on Suspicion of Smuggling: CESTAT 

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad, has set aside the...

GST Appellate Authority Can’t Send Demand Back for Document Verification: GSTAT

The GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Ernakulam Bench has held that a first appellate authority...

CENVAT Credit Can’t Be Denied When Dept. Failed To Establish Company Received Invoices Without Receiving Copper Scrap: CESTAT 

The Allahabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...