THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J
Pawan Kumar Singh @ Sri Pawan Singh Son Of Late Ganga Sagar Singh - Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India And 2 Ors. - Respondent
WP(C) 310 / 2025
Decided On : 24-01-2025
(A) Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Sections 29(2)(c) and 39(1) - Cancellation of GST registration - Petitioner's registration was cancelled for non-furnishing of returns for over six months - Court noted that if the petitioner complies with requirements, the authority may restore registration - Cancellation entails serious civil consequences. (Paras 2 .1, 6, 8)
(B) Provisions of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 - Procedure for cancellation of registration - If a registered person is ready to furnish pending returns and pay dues, the officer can drop proceedings. (Paras 5 , 6 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a sole proprietor of a restaurant, had his GST registration cancelled due to non-filing of returns for six months. He claimed he was unaware of the show cause notice uploaded on the portal. (Paras 2 , 2.2)
Findings of Court:
The court held that the petitioner could seek restoration of his GST registration by complying with the necessary requirements. (Paras 8 )
Issues: The main issue was whether the cancellation of GST registration was justified given the petitioner's circumstances and willingness to comply. (Paras 8 )
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that cancellation of GST registration has serious consequences and that compliance with the law could lead to restoration of registration. (Paras 6 , 8 )
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions for restoration of GST registration upon compliance.
ORDER :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Heard Mr. R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, CGST for all the respondents.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the sole proprietor of a firm by the name, M/s Saffron Restaurant and he got himself registered as a dealer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 . When he applied for registration, the petitioner was issued a registration certificate in Form GST REG-06 with Registration no. 18AYBPS4596C3Z3 and GSTIN no. 18AYBPS4596C3Z3 w.e.f. 17.05.2018.
2.1. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 05.09.2023 asking him to show cause as to why the registration certificate issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax [CGST] Act, 2017 in his favour should not be cancelled due to non-furnishing of returns in terms of Section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017 for a continuous period of 6 [six] or more months. The petitioner was, thereby, directed to furnish his reply within a period of 30 [thirty] days from the date of service of the said show cause notice and was also asked to appear in person before the authority issuing the show cause notice on 03.10.2023. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 21.11.2023 came to be passed whereby the petitioner’s GST registration has been cancelled under Section 29[2][c] of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 for not furnishing returns for a continuous period of 6 [six] or more months.
2.2. The petitioner has averred that as the show cause notice was uploaded in the common portal, the petitioner despite exercise of his diligence, failed to notice the fact of uploading of the show cause notice in the common portal and as a result, he could not submit any reply to the show cause notice dated 05.09.2023.
3. Section 39[1] of the CGST Act, 2017 inter alia requires a registered person to furnish a return for every calendar month or part thereof, electronically, of inward and outward supplies of goods or services or both, input tax credit availed, tax payable, tax paid and such other particulars, in such form and manner, and within such time, as may be prescribed.
4. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that due to reasons beyond his control, the petitioner could not submit the returns required to be submitted under Section 39[1] of the CGST Act, 2017 for a period of about 6 [six] months or more. He has, however, submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to comply with all the formalities required as per proviso to sub-rule [4] of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
5. As per Section 29[2][c], an officer, duly empowered, may cancel the GST registration of a person from such date, including any retrospective date, as he deems fit, where any registered person, has not furnished returns for a continuous period of 6 [six] months. Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 has laid down the procedure for cancellation of the registration. For ready reference, Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 is quoted herein below in its entirety :-
Cancellation of GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) can be contested if the petitioner is willing to comply with filing requirements and pay dues.
GST registration can be restored if the taxpayer complies with filing requirements and pays outstanding dues, despite prior cancellation due to non-filing.
Registered firms must comply with tax return submissions to maintain registration; proper notice must be given before cancellation, ensuring due process.
If a taxpayer is ready to comply with GST filing requirements after cancellation for non-filing, the empowered officer may restore their registration under the CGST Rules.
Technical portal glitches cannot deny taxpayer's statutory right to apply for GST registration revocation within 90 days after curing defects.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.