Registration cancellation under tax law can be contested upon subsequent compliance with return filing requirements, subject to conditions regarding input tax credits.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner was a registered tax payer under the provisions of the CGST and KGST Act . The grievances highlighted by the petitioner are against the cancellation of the registration under CGST Act , for not submitting returns for six months, .i.e, for the period from January 2023 to June 2023. Ext.P2 is the show cause notice issued on 06.06.2023 and Ext.P3 is the order cancelling the registration, with effect from

16.06.2024.

2. The case of the petitioner is that, subsequent to the cancellation of the registration, the petitioner had filed returns for the entire period from 16.09.2024 along with tax, penalty and other charges in this regard. The reliefs sought by the petitioner in this writ petition are as follows:-

(I) Call for the records leading to the issuance of Ext P3 cancellation Order and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal by issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order;

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the Respondent to revoke the cancellation of the Petitioner’s GST registration (GSTIN: 32ABAFR0019F1ZX) and restore the same granting the Petitioner an opportunity to file any pending returns for the period subsequent to Ext P-3 order subject to payment of applicable taxes, interest, and reasonable penalties or costs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit;

(iii) Issue such other writs, orders, or directions which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. I have heard Sri. G. Harikumar (Gopinathan Nair), the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Arun Ajay Shankar, the learned Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents.

4. The relief sought by the petitioner is mainly placing reliance upon Ext.P10 judgment rendered by the Madras High Court, as evidenced by Ext.P10, wherein, in similar circumstances, the registration of the petitioner therein was directed to be restored upon the tax payer submitting the returns along with fee fixed for belated returns within a period of 45 days and also subject to the condition that, the petitioner therein shall not be entitled to get adjustment from the input tax which may be lying unutilised/unclaimed in the hands of the petitioner.

5. After considering all the relevant aspects, including the observations made by the Madras High Court in Ext.P10, I am of the view that, an interference can be made. This is particularly because, the petitioner approached this Court after filing all the returns for the relevant period and remitting the taxes along with interest as well as the fee fixed for belated filing of returns.

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to restore the registration of the petitioner forthwith. However, it is clarified that, the petitioner shall not be entitled to the claim of input tax credit for the period during which the registration remained cancelled.

Sd/-