Kamal Kumar vs Assistant Commissioner
2026 Latest Caselaw 1133 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Kamal Kumar vs Assistant Commissioner on 17 February, 2026

                                                               2026:UHC:1044-DB


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL
     HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
                           AND
          HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY

                             17TH FEBRUARY, 2026

          WRIT PETITION (M/B) No. 885 OF 2025

Kamal Kumar                                                      ....Petitioner.

                                   Versus


Assistant Commissioner, State Goods and Service Tax,
Sector-8, Dehradun, Uttarakhand.       ...Respondent


Counsel for the petitioner         :   Sri Rohit Arora, learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondent         :   Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder
                                       for the State of Uttarakhand.



JUDGMENT :

(Per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)

1. Present writ petition has been filed praying for the

following reliefs:

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned Order of rejection of application for rectification issued by the Respondent bearing No. ZD050825001808C dated 02.08.2025 (ANNEXURE-2);

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari quashing the Order issued under section 74, GST Act 2017 along with the Summary of the Order vide FORM GST DRC-

07 bearing reference no. ZD0512220050580 dated 14/12/2022 (ANNEXURE-3);

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to consider the matter of the petitioner afresh;

(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to restrain from taking any coercive step against the Petitioner in regard to the impugned Order of rejection of application for rectification issued by the Respondent bearing No. ZD050825001808C

2026:UHC:1044-DB

dated 02.08.2025 (ANNEXURE-2) and Order issued under section 74, GST Act 2017 along with the Summary of the Order vide FORM GST DRC-07 bearing reference no. ZD0512220050580 dated 14/12/2022 (ΑΝNNEXURE-3);"

2. It is not disputed before us that the petitioner has

availed input tax credit, which, according to the Department was

based on alleged supplies by a non-existent entity. Thereafter, the

Department issued Show Cause Notice dated 15.03.2022 raising

demand of CGST and penalty. The petitioner is stated to have filed

a reply on 23.03.2022. A second Show Cause Notice was issued

on 03.06.2022 followed by the third Notice dated 06.06.2022.

3. According to the petitioner, on 13.06.2022 it deposited

Rs. 5,40,000/- under the IGST through its Cash Ledger. However,

without considering the said fact and the explanation given by the

petitioner-firm, the impugned order dated 14.12.2022 was passed.

On 25.03.2025 the petitioner was issued a Show Cause Notice for

cancellation of GST registration on the ground of default in

payment of GST dues. The petitioner-firm on 02.04.2025 filed an

Application for rectification. Additional documents were filed on

03.07.2025. On 2nd August, 2025, the Department passed the

order rejecting the Rectification Application on the ground that it

was filed beyond the prescribed period.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner-firm has already deposited the entire amount and in

such circumstances, the Application of the petitioner for

rectification should have been decided on merits, instead of going

into technicalities.

2026:UHC:1044-DB

5. The fact relating to the petitioner-firm having made

deposits of the alleged amount due against it does not find mention

in the impugned order dated 02.08.2025.

6. As the said fact would have material bearing, therefore,

we set aside the impugned order dated 02.08.2025 and permit the

petitioner to file a fresh application, along with evidence regarding

the deposit made, in which event, the Application for rectification

would be examined on merits without raising any objection

regarding limitation and shall be decided by a speaking order after

affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

7. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands

allowed to the extent stated above.

8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of

accordingly.

_____________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.

___________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

Dt: 17th February, 2026 Rathour

PRAVINDRA

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=23699ccc2fd40ad81b6fd13323779d9e3ae

SINGH b1097d17dbb53d481cabd25946eed, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=1F65499E931DF71CDAF92A40CC617

RATHOUR 9B8E010331BA695239171F906FD5C45C4E8, cn=PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2026.02.18 17:00:23 +05'30'