Kipa Tapu Vs Union of India and 4 Ors (Gauhati High Court)
The Gauhati High Court considered a writ petition challenging cancellation of the Petitioner’s GST registration for non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months. The Petitioner stated that his proprietorship business, “TOSD Enterprise”, was registered under the CGST/AGST Acts and that, being non-conversant with the online procedure, he could not respond to the show cause notice dated 16th April 2025. The registration was subsequently cancelled by order dated 30th May 2025.
The Petitioner submitted that he had subsequently furnished pending returns up to March 2025 and paid GST dues along with late fees and interest. However, he could not file an application for revocation because the prescribed period had expired. He expressed willingness to comply with the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
The Court considered Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, particularly the proviso to Rule 22(4), which provides for dropping cancellation proceedings where pending returns are furnished and tax dues, applicable interest and late fee are fully paid. The Court also noted that cancellation of registration entails serious civil consequences.
The Court held that the empowered officer has authority and jurisdiction to consider restoration where the Petitioner furnishes all pending returns and makes the required payments. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the concerned authority within two months. The authority was directed to consider the application in accordance with law and preferably complete the process within 60 days from receipt of the certified copy of the order. The Petitioner would also remain liable for arrears of tax, penalty, interest and late fees.
