GAHC010270252025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/7019/2025

RATAN KUMAR HALDER

S/O BINOD BIHARI HALDER, R/O NAW PUKHURI ROAD, MILAN PALLY,

TINSUKIA 786125

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. OF GOVT. OF ASSAM,

DEPTT. OF FINANCE AND TAXATION, DISPUR, ASSAM.

2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

STATE TAX

KAR BHAWAN

G.S. ROAD

DISPUR

GUWAHATI 781006

3:THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER

STATE TAX TISUKIA 6

TISUKIA ZONE

ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K GUPTA, MS. M DEY,MS B SARMA,MR. R S MISHRA

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE AND TAXATION,

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

ORDER

17.12.2025 Heard Shri R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri B.

Gogoi, learned counsel appearing for the Finance and Taxation Department, Government of Assam.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been carrying out his proprietorship business under the name & style, “M/S R.K. Trading Co.” as the sole proprietor. He is an Assesee registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017/Assam Goods and Services Tax (AGST) Act, 2017 bearing registration No. 18ABIPH0322D1ZA. On the reason 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. ZA180621015163Z dated 30.06.2021 asking him to furnish reply to the aforesaid notice within a period of 7 (seven) 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 personal hearing was given. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 09.07.2021 was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Tinsukia-6 whereby the petitioner’s GST registration has been cancelled without assigning any reason.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to the loss sustained during Covid-19, he could not visit the GST portal and accordingly could not submit any reply to the said show cause notice in time. It is further contended that when the petitioner came across the said notice, the time for filing reply was already over and order had also been uploaded in the portal.

4. The petitioner further contends that after recovering from impact of Covid- 19, he updated all his pending returns up to the month of July, 2021 as allowed by the GST portal and while updating his returns, the petitioner has also discharged all his GST dues along with his late fees and interest.

5. Thereafter, the petitioner 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 petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

7. Shri Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner has 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.

8. 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. The said Rule 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 liab