Dhirghat Hardware Stores vs Union of India

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2025 Supreme(Gau) 1741

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.
Dhirghat Hardware Stores And Anr – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India And 3 Ors – Respondents
WP(C) 5944 of 2025
Decided on : 17-10-2025

Important Points

The court emphasized the requirement for procedural compliance under the CGST Rules, highlighting that restoration of GST registration is possible if pending returns and dues are settled.

Subject

Taxation - GST Compliance

Act Referred

CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX RULES : R.22, R.22(4)
CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT : S.29(2)(c), S.44, S.73(10)

Headnote

(A) Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 29(2)(c) - Cancellation of GST registration - The petitioner's registration was cancelled for non-filing of returns over six months, with no notice of personal hearing provided - The court found that a contravention of the procedure under Rule 22 of the CGST Rules must be addressed - Petition allowed for the petitioner to approach the concerned authority for restoration. (Paras 2, 10, 12, and 13)

(B) Compliance requirements - The court noted that if the petitioner files all pending returns and pays applicable dues within stipulated time, the authority may restore the GST registration - Civil consequences of cancellation underscore the need for adherence to procedural fairness. (Paras 10, 12)

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shri R.S. Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent: Shri K. Jain, learned counsel on behalf of Shri S.C. Keyal, Sr. SC, CGST.

Table of Content
1. petitioners' gst registration cancelled for non-filing returns. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. petitioners express willingness to comply with formalities. (Para 6 , 7)
3. legal provisions regarding gst cancellation and restoration. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. court outlines considerations for potential restoration. (Para 11 , 12)
5. court orders petitioners to seek restoration within two months. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)

JUDGMENT & ORDER

SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.

Heard Shri R. S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri K. Jain, learned counsel appearing on instructions of Shri S. C. Keyal, learned Senior Standing Counsel, CGST for the respondents.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner no. 2 has been carrying out his business under the name & style, “M/S Dhirghat Hardware Stores”. He is the sole proprietor and is an assessee registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017/Assam Goods and Services Tax (AGST) Act, 2017 bearing registration No. 18AASFD1459Q1ZK. Because of non-filing of GST returns for a continuous period of six months, the petitioner was served with a show cause notice bearing reference No. ZA180123023279Q dated 15.01.2023 asking the petitioner to furnish reply to the aforesaid notice within a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of service of notice and it was mentioned in the aforesaid show cause notice that if the petitioner fails to furnish a reply within the stipulated date or fails to appear for personal hearing on the appointed date and time, the case will be decided ex-parte on the basis of the available records and on merits. However, no date of hearing was notified. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 22.03.2023 was passed by the Superintendent, Dhubri-1, Bongaigaon Division, whereby the petitioner’s GST registration has been cancelled without assigning any reason.

3. The petitioners contend that petitioner no. 2 being not much conversant with the online procedure, could not submit any reply to the said show cause notice. It is further contended that when the petitioner no. 2 came across the said notice, the time for filing reply was already over and order had also been uploaded in the portal. Though the petitioners preferred appeal, the same was dismissed vide order dated 09.10.2025.

4. The petitioners further contend that petitioners have updated all pending returns upto the month of March, 2023 as allowed by the GST portal and while updating returns, the petitioners have also discharged all GST dues along with late fees and interest.

5. Thereafter, the petitioners tried to file the necessary application seeking revocation of GST cancellation, however, the same could not be filed as the time limit prescribed for filing of revocation application was elapsed and a message was displayed in the screen “timeline of 270 days from the date of cancellation order provided to taxpayer to file application for revocation of cancellation is expired.”

6. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

7. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are 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.

8. As per Section 29 (2)(c) of the Act, 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.

9. Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 being the bone of contention, is extracted herein below:-

Rule 22 : Cancellation of Registration

(1) Where the proper officer has reasons to believe that the registration of a person is liable to be cancelled under Section 29 , he shall issue a notice to such person in FORM GST REG-17, requiring him to show cause, w