M/S SOLANKI ENTERPRISES v. COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND ANR

1. Petitioner 27.01.2021, whereby the GST Registration of the petitioner has been cancelled. Petitioner dated 13.01.2020 which led to the passing of the cancellation order dated 27.01.2021. dated 23.11.2022, whereby the appeal seeking setting aside of IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT

NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15616/2023 M/S SOLANKI ENTERPRISES..... Petitioner versus COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND ANR..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Ashish Agarwal, Mr. Oshin Gupta & Mr. Samyak Jain, Advocates. For the Respondent: Ms. Samiksha Godiyal & Mr. Nishchaiy Sharma, Advocates. HON’BLE MR.

JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA HON'BLE MR.

JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) Petitioner seeks quashing of the cancellation order dated Petitioner also seeks setting aside of the show dated 27.01.2021. Petitioner also seeks setting aside of appellate order IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT

NEW DELHI Date of decision: 01.02.2024..... Petitioner..... Respondents Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Ashish Agarwal, Mr. Oshin Gupta Ms. Samiksha Godiyal & Mr. Nishchaiy Sharma, seeks quashing of the cancellation order dated also seeks setting aside of the show-cause notice also seeks setting aside of appellate order cancellation was rejected.

2. By order dated 22.12.2023 of this Court, whereby this Court had directed the respondents to c the petitioner seeking revocation of the cancellation also directed the respondents to take instructions as to whether petitioner’s Electronic Credit Ledger had the requisite balance to cover the entire

3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that she has received instructions dated 18.01.2024 from the office of the Deputy Commissioner to state that there was a short balance of Rs.9,520/ 194 days in th petitioner has to pay interest of Rs.911/ allowed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall deposit the said amount within two days. On the petition depositing the said amount, respondent revocation application and revoke the Registration of the petitioner which shall then be restored in accordance with law.

5. Needless to state that petitioner would have to make the necessary compliance as required under law, cancellation was rejected. order dated 22.12.2023 of this Court, whereby this Court had directed the respondents to consider the revocation application of the petitioner seeking revocation of the cancellation. tax liability throughout the subject period. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that she has Commissioner to state that there was a short balance of Rs.9,520/ 194 days in the Credit Ledger of the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner has to pay interest of Rs.911/- before the revocation can be Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall deposit the said amount within two days. On the petition depositing the said amount, respondents shall proceed further with the revocation application and revoke the cancellation accordance with law. Needless to state that petitioner would have to make the necessary compliance as required under law, when the registration is order dated 22.12.2023 of this Court, whereby this Court onsider the revocation application of. This Court had tax liability throughout the subject period. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that she has Commissioner to state that there was a short balance of Rs.9,520/- for e Credit Ledger of the petitioner. Accordingly, before the revocation can be Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall deposit the said amount within two days. On the petitioner shall proceed further with the cancellation of the GST Needless to state that petitioner would have to make the the registration is restored.

6. Petition is FEBRUARY 1, 2024 B.S. Rohella is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J RAVINDER DUDEJA FEBRUARY 1, 2024 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J RAVINDER DUDEJA, J