Form No. J(2)

Daily List Item No. 36

Court No. 2

b.r.

CIRCUIT BENCH OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

AT JALPAIGURI APPELLATE SIDE

Present:-

The Hon’ble Justice Aniruddha Roy

WPA 1737 of 2025

Dinesh Biswas

-vs-

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

For the petitioner : Mr. Bikramaditya Ghosh

Mr. Rajiv Parik

Ms. Supriya Singh

Mr. Ved Rai

Mr. Mayank Bhandari

Mr. Vivek Saha

For the State

: Mr. Pretom Das

Mr. Rima Sarkar

Heard On : 02.09.2025 Judgement on : 02.09.2025

Aniruddha Roy,J. :

Affidavit of service filed in Court today, is taken on record.

Facts:

1. Through this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the

impugned cancellation of GST registration dated March 26, 2025,

annexure p-3 at page 17 to the writ petition. The observation of the GST authority form the said impugned order is quoted below :-

“This has reference to show cause notice issued dated 05/07/2023.

Whereas no reply to the show cause notice has been submitted, and whereas, the undersigned based on record available with this office is of the opinion that your registration is liable to be cancelled for following reasons(s):

1. Others Remarks :

Section 29(2)(c)- Person, other than paying tax u/s 10, failed to furnish returns for prescribed periods. The effective date of cancellation of your registration is

01/12/2022.

2. Kindly refer to the supportive document(s) attached for case specific details. - Not Applicable 3. It may be noted that a registered person furnishing return under sub-section (1) of section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017 is required to furnish a final return in FORM GSTR-10 within three months of the date of this order.

4. Your are required to furnish all your pending returns.

5. It may be noted that the cancellation of registration shall not affect the liability to pay tax and other dues under this Act or to discharge any obligation under this Act or the rules made thereunder for any period prior to the date of cancellation whether or not such tax and other dues are determined before or after the date of cancellation.”

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. Bikramaditya Ghosh, 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. Mr. Ghosh further submits that unless the said GST registration is restored, the petitioner will not be able to carry 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.

6. Mr. Ghosh 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 out 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 will not earn any benefit.

7. In support of the above contention, 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)