Technical portal glitches cannot deny taxpayer's statutory right to apply for GST registration revocation within 90 days after curing defects.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a registered taxpayer under the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act. The grievance of the petitioner is against the cancellation of the registration of the petitioner and the denial of the opportunity to get the same restored, even after submitting the returns before the expiry of the period fixed for revocation of the order of cancellation of registration.

2. The fact that led to the filing of the writ petition is as follows:

The registration of the petitioner was cancelled as per Ext.P2 order passed on 08.01.2026. The reason for cancellation of the registration was that, the petitioner failed to submit the returns for the period of more than six months. The petitioner submitted the returns for the months up to October, 2025 and also submitted an application for revoking the order of cancellation of registration on 16.01.2026. However, the said application was not entertained, in view of the fact that the monthly returns for some more months were to be submitted by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner submitted all the returns up to January 2026, i.e., till the month of the order passed for cancellation of registration, and attempted to submit a fresh application on 17.02.2026. However, the case of the petitioner is that, the said application was not accepted into the portal, in view of the fact that the petitioner had already submitted an application for 16.01.2026, which was not entertained due to the non-filing of the returns for the entire period. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner in such circumstances.

3. I have heard, Sri. Muraleedharan.R, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Suvin R.Menon, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent and Sri. Arun Ajayshankar, the learned Government Pleader for the 2nd respondent.

4. As regards Ext.P2 order of cancellation of registration is concerned, the same was passed on 18.01.2026, for the sole reason that, the petitioner failed to submit the returns for the period of more than six months. As perSection 30of theCGST Actread with Rule 23 of theCGST Rules, the taxpayer whose registration got cancelled owing to non-submission of the returns, can get the order of cancellation of registration revoked, by submitting an application in this regard within a period of 90 days from the date of service of the order of cancellation of registration. In this case, the petitioner's application, which was submitted on 17.02.2026, was not entertained, despite the fact that the petitioner had submitted all the returns up to the date of cancellation of registration, for the reason that the earlier application submitted by the petitioner on 16.01.2026 stands rejected due to the fact that all returns were submitted. Apparently, the non-entertainment of the said application was in view of the technical features of the web portal. However, on going through the statutory stipulations contained inSection 30of theCGST Actread with Rule 23 of theCGST Rules, the fact that the earlier application was not considered, by itself, cannot be a reason to deny the opportunity to the taxpayer to submit a fresh application within the time stipulated for such an application, which is 90 days. This is especially in cases where, the 1stapplication was rejected for the reason that the petitioner did not furnish all the returns and when the 2ndapplication was submitted after curing the defect pointed out in the earlier application. Since this is a statutory right available to the taxpayer to get the registration restored, after complying with all legal requirements, such taxpayer is entitled to claim the same as of right.

6. Therefore the fact that the web portal does n