THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRI T PETI TI ON No.32295 of 2025

ORDER

(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Mr. K.P. Amarnath Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax for the respondents.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 26.08.2024, (Annexure P-3) passed the respondent No.1, whereby the GST registration of the petitioner stood cancelled w.e.f. 12.07.2023 on the ground of alleged violation of Rule 21(d) and Rule 10A (Bank details). The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 10.10.2025, (Annexure P5) passed by respondent No.2, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against cancellation of GST registration also stood rejected.

3. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is a propriety concern engaged in the business of works contract. The petitioner got itself registered with GSTN No.36DQSPG6583F1ZA under the GST Act. The petitioner was issued with a registration certificate on 12.07.2023, based on which the petitioner was carrying on his business. However, because of the loss incurred by the petitioner in business, he could not carry on the business to its fullest extent till the year 2024. Subsequently, upon arranging certain funds from his close associates and friends, the petitioner again intended to carry on the business. It was then in July, 2025, that the petitioner was informed by respondent No.1 about his GST registration getting cancelled and when he enquired from the GST portal it was learnt that a show cause notice was initially issued on 01.03.2024 alleging violation of Rule 21(d) and Rule 10A (Bank Details). According to the petitioner, the registration got cancelled on account of the petitioner not furnishing the bank account details with the Department, which was primarily on account of ignorance and not having full knowledge so far as the requisite compliance is concerned and the consultant who had assisted him in obtaining registration certificate also did not make him aware of the formalities and compliances those are required to be done. In order to make good the default, the petitioner immediately approached the Appellate Authority i.e. respondent No.2 on 26.07.2025 along with a condone delay petition. However, the respondent No.2 without properly appreciating the factual matrix of the case and the ground under which the condonation of delay was sought, in a mechanical manner rejected the appeal on the ground of it being beyond the condonation of delay prescribed under Section 107(1) and Section 107(4) of the CGST Act.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, contended that the lapse on the part of the petitioner in not timely uploading the bank account details was neither deliberate nor with any mala fides and with an intention to take any added advantage. But because of being totally ignorant of the same and unaware of the requirement and unaware of the consequences. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner had also preferred a fresh revocation application, however the GST portal did not permit the petitioner to file a fresh revocation application.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in order to survive and revive the business, requirement of restoration of GST registration has become necessary and the petitioner is also in the process of getting certain works contract and for which reason also, the restoration of GST registration has become must. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, let the Department again permit the petitioner to make good the default by paying whatever fine or penalty that is required to be paid, enabling the petitioner to restore his GST registration.

6. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax contended that after obtaining the