Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Sri Biki Rajkonwar, son of Sri Gyan Raj Konwar, resident of Lakwa Dehingia Konwar Gaon, District Sivasagar, Assam, claimed to be engaged in the business of providing Light Motor Vehicles on hire to ONGCL, and held GST registration No. 18AYNPR7434E3ZX under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Due to non-filing of GST returns for a continuous period of six months, his registration was cancelled on 17.03.2023. He filed W.P.(C)/5752/2023 before the Gauhati High Court seeking revocation of the cancellation, stating that he was willing to regularly file returns and pay applicable taxes going forward. Respondents included the Union of India, the Principal Commissioner of Central GST, Guwahati, the Assistant Commissioner of Central GST, Dibrugarh Division, and the Superintendent, Central GST, Sivasagar Range. On 11.10.2023, the matter was heard by Justice Suman Shyam, with counsel for both sides present.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner, whose GST registration stood cancelled for non-filing of returns for six continuous months, could be granted a route to seek revocation despite being unable to make an online application.
  2. Whether restoration of registration could be directed subject to compliance with Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017, including payment of tax, penalty, and late fee and filing of pending returns.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner argued that after cancellation of his GST registration he had been unable to make even an online request for reviving the registration, leaving him without a practical remedy.
  • He submitted that he was willing to regularly file returns and pay taxes and penalties as applicable under law, and sought a direction permitting an offline route to seek restoration.
  • Once the Department indicated the terms on which restoration could be considered, the petitioner's counsel confirmed his client was agreeable to that course, making further contest unnecessary.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Standing Counsel for the GST authorities submitted, on instructions, that the process of revocation of cancellation of registration must follow the mandate of Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
  • The Department indicated that if the Court issued a direction to that effect, the petitioner's case for restoration would be considered, subject to payment of necessary tax, penalty, filing of returns, and payment of late fee.

Court Order/Findings

  • Noting that both sides were agreeable to a workable resolution, the Court held that no practical purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending further.
  • The Court directed that within two weeks the petitioner shall approach the concerned authorities offline, seeking restoration of his GST registration, enclosing a copy of the order, and that necessary steps be taken as per the requirement of the Rules to restore the registration as expeditiously as possible.
  • The petition was disposed of on these terms without any adjudication on the merits of the original cancellation.

Important Clarification

Where the GST portal does not permit an online application for revocation once the statutory window has lapsed or where cancellation followed non-filing of returns for six months, courts have been willing to direct an offline representation route under Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017, conditioned on the assessee clearing outstanding tax, penalty, and late fee, and filing all pending returns. This is a practical template for similarly placed taxpayers whose registrations were cancelled for return-filing defaults and who are otherwise willing to comply.

Sections Involved

  • Section 29, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – empowers cancellation of GST registration, including for continuous non-filing of returns.
  • Rule 23, Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 – prescribes the procedure and conditions for revocation of cancellation of GST registration, including payment of dues and filing of pending returns.

Decision – In Favour of

This is a consent-based disposal with directions rather than a merits adjudication. Read honestly, it is disposed of with directions, in part in favour of the Assessee — the petitioner secured a concrete, time-bound offline pathway to seek restoration of his GST registration, but only on terms (payment of tax, penalty, late fee, and filing of returns) largely proposed by the Department itself, and without any finding that the original cancellation was illegal.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: Gauhati High Court (Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)
  • Case No.: WP(C)/5752/2023
  • CNR: GAHC010219982023
  • Coram: Justice Suman Shyam
  • Decision Date: 11 October 2023
  • Disposal Nature: Disposed of with directions

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (PDF)

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.