Uttarakhand High Court
WPMB/529/2026 of M/S AGLAR POWER LIMITED Vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SGST on 19 June 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 529 OF 2026 19TH JUNE, 2026 M/s Aglar Power Limited …… Petitioner Versus Asstt. Commissioner, State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY
WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 529 OF 2026
19TH JUNE, 2026
M/s Aglar Power Limited
…… Petitioner
Versus
Asstt. Commissioner, State Goods & Services Tax
…… Respondent
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Rohit Arora, learned counsel through video conferencing
Counsel for the respondents : Ms. Puja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the State / revenue
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT: (per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
The petitioner has assailed the order dated 21.03.2025 cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner firm on the ground that it had failed to file the returns within prescribed period.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical facts and circumstances in WPMB No. 39 of 2025 a Co-ordinate Bench has permitted the petitioner therein to file application for revocation of the cancellation order and subject to deposit of unpaid tax along with interest and penalty, the competent authority has been directed to decide the application for revocation of the cancellation order. The operative part of the order passed in said writ petition is as follows : “8. Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of by permitting petitioner to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order. If he makes such application within two weeks from today and also furnishes all the pending returns and deposits unpaid tax along with interest and amount of penalty, the Competent Authority shall consider the petitioner’s prayer for revocation as per law within four weeks from the date of receipt of such application.”
It is urged that similar liberty may be granted to the petitioner.
Ms. Puja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue appearing through video conferencing has no objection in case the present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as WPMB No. 39 of 2025.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
_______________________
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
_________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
Dt: 19TH JUNE, 2026 Negi
HIMANS HU NEGI Digitally signed by HIMANSHU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aa f116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90d575 7, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC5 1A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C18 DB2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2026.06.19 17:00:27 +05'30'