SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 42364

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. Saravanan, J
Rahul Trading – Appellant
Versus
Superintendent – Respondent
Writ Petition | WMP.No.17846 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Chinnasamy V
For the Respondents: K.S.Ramasamy

The High Court may exercise its discretionary power to remit a GST registration cancellation matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration, despite the petitioner's failure to participate in initial revocation hearings, in the interest of justice and merit-based adjudication.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged the cancellation of its GST registration under the CGST Act, 2017, invoked on grounds of fraud or willful misstatement under Section 29(2)(e). Despite filing an application for revocation, the petitioner failed to appear for the personal hearing, leading to the rejection of the revocation application via Form GST REG-05. The court examined the administrative procedures under Section 30 and determined that although the petitioner failed to exhaust the statutory revocation process effectively, justice warrants an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. The core issue centers on whether an assessee can seek judicial review after missing the opportunity for personal hearing in revocation proceedings. The court reasoned that while normally the exhaustion of remedies is required, the court may exercise its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to remit the matter back to the authority to ensure a decision is made on merits, provided the petitioner cooperates. The Writ Petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent to re-adjudicate upon the petitioner's compliance with hearing requirements.

Table of Content
1. admissibility of writ petition with consent. (Para 1 , 2)
2. administrative history leading to cancellation and failed revocation attempt. (Para 3)
3. power of court to remand matter for fresh hearing on merits. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER

Mr.K.S.Ramasamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel takes notice for the Respondent.

2. This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Respondent.

3. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner is before this Court challenging the impugned order dated 07.07.2025 in Form GST REG-19, whereby the GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled pursuant to the Show Cause Notice in Form GST REG-17 dated 19.05.2025, in the absence of the reply. The reasons given for the cancellation of registration in the said order read as under :-

“Remarks:

As per Section 29(2)(e) of CGST Act 2017- Registration obtained by means of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts. Hence registration is cancelled.”

4. In this background, the petitioner moved an application under Section

30 read with Rule 23 of the respective GST Rules on 16.08.2025, seeking revocation of the cancellation of GST registration. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued in Form GST REG – 23, calling upon the petitioner to respond and to appear for a personal hearing on 10.09.2025. However, the petitioner failed to appear, and consequently, the application filed for revocation was rejected on 12.09.2025 in Form GST REG – 05.

5. Having exhausted the remedy under Section 30 of the respective GST enactments, it is no longer open to the petitioner to assail the impugned cancellation order dated 07.07.2025 in form GST REG-19. However, considering the fact that the petitioner failed to participate in the revocation proceedings pursuant to the application filed on 16.08.2025, the Court is inclined to remit the matter back to the respondent for passing a fresh order.

6. Accordingly, the respondent is directed to pass a fresh order in light of the order dated 12.09.2025 in Form GST REG – 05, subject to the petitioner cooperating with the respondent. The respondent shall fix a date for hearing, and thereafter pass a fresh order on merits, upon the petitioner filing a reply within the time stipulated.

7. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations.

No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top