Cancellation of GST registration on procedural grounds can be set aside if non-compliance is curable, emphasizing substantive justice and the court's equitable jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT :

Aniruddha Roy, J.

Facts:

1. Through this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned cancellation of GST registration dated November 3, 2021, Annexure-P3 at page 15 to the writ petition. The observation of the GST authority from the said impugned order is quoted below :

“Order for Cancellation of Registration

This has reference to your reply dated 03/11/2021 in response to the notice to show cause dated 21/10/2021. Whereas no reply to notice to show cause has been submitted.

The effective date of cancellation of your registration is 01/05/2019 Determination of amount payable pursuant to cancellation:

Accordingly, the amount payable by you and the computation and basis thereof is as follows :

The amounts determined as being payable above are without prejudice to any amount that may be found to be payable you on submission of final return furnished by you.

You are required to pay the following amounts on or before 13/11/2021 failing which the amount will be recovered in accordance with the provisions of the Act and rules made thereunder.

Place : West Bengal
Date : 03/11/2021”

2. From the observations made in the impugned order, it appears that initially there was a show cause notice issued upon the petitioner and no reply was submitted by the petitioner in response to the said show cause notice. The observations further show that there were certain procedural irregularities on the part of the petitioner for which the GST registration was cancelled.

3. Mr. Satyajit Paul, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in his usual fairness submits that there is an appellate provision under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, the said 2017 Act.). No appeal has been preferred.

4. With the passage of time, the statutory period of preferring the appeal stands expired including the grace period as provided under the statute.

5. The petitioner applied for revocation of cancellation of the registration certificate on August 21, 2025. The application was not accepted by the revenue authority, submitted on the portal.

6. Mr. Paul further submits that unless the said GST registration is restored, the petitioner will not be able to carry on his business and as a result shall suffer immense prejudice and shall be deprived of his livelihood. He further submits that the petitioner is agreeable to comply with all the procedural requirements which are necessary for restoration of the GST registration.

7. Mr. Paul further submits that in the event the GST registration is restored after making necessary statutory payments and if thereafter the petitioner is allowed to carry on the business, it would generate further revenue out of which the petitioner will also be able to pay the revenue authority the necessary levies in due process of law and ultimately the revenue authority shall be benefitted and the State will earn the exchequers. By keeping this GST registration cancelled, the revenue authority will not earn any benefit.

8. In support of the above contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred the following decisions:

(i) The decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench dated April 9, 2024, In the matter of: Subhankar Golder –vs- Assistant Commissioner of State Tax. Serampore Charge & Ors. rendered in MAT 639 of 2024 and

(ii) a decision of the coordinate bench dated July 29, 2025, In the matter of : Marjina Khatun C/o. Anarun Islam Sarkar –vs- Union of India & Ors. rendered in WPA 1542 of 2025.

9. In the light of the abo