Uttarakhand High Court
WPMB/282/2026 of AYUSH SHARMA Vs COMMISSIONER STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX on 21 April 2026
Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 21.04.2026 WPMB No.282 of 2026 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J. Mr. Tarun Pandey and Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned
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.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
21.04.2026
WPMB No.282 of 2026 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Mr. Tarun Pandey and Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Ms. Pooja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State through V.C.
3. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking the following reliefs:- “a. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the record of the case and quash the cancellation of GST Registration order dated 10/11/2022 (Annexure No.3 to W.P Page no.1.5) as petitioner is ready to pay all the balance tax, interest on it and late fee if any.
b. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus permitting the petitioner to prefer an application U/S 30 of the UKGST/CGST Act 2017, for filing an application for revocation of the cancellation of the GST registration bearing number GSTIN 05FTIPS2066C1ZP of the Petitioner and further direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the application of the Petitioner in accordance with law. C. Issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble court deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the present case. Award the cost to the petitioner throughout.”
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy is squarely covered by the judgment dated 24.02.2025, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs.
State Tax Officer.
6. This fact is admitted by learned counsel for the respondents.
7. Since, the matter is covered, instant petition is decided in terms of the judgment dated 24.02.2025, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPMB No.39 of 2025, M/s Anshul Enterprises through its proprietor Vs. State Tax Officer.
(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.)
21.04.2026 BS