Facts of the Case

This writ petition before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Amaravati) challenged an order dated 02.03.2023 cancelling the petitioner's GST registration and a subsequent order dated 24.04.2023 rejecting the petitioner's application for revocation of that cancellation, both passed by the second respondent. The registration had been cancelled on the ground that the petitioner had not filed returns up to that date. The petitioner's counsel explained that the petitioner had not received payment from a government department for services already rendered, and it was this non-receipt that had prevented timely filing of returns. After the registration was cancelled, the petitioner applied for revocation, but that application too was rejected on 24.04.2023, again for non-filing of returns. The matter was heard by a Division Bench of Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao and Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu on 10.10.2023. The order does not record the petitioner's name, GSTIN or the specific sections invoked in the cancellation order.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns, and the rejection of the revocation application on the same ground, could be sustained given the petitioner's explanation for the delay.
  2. Whether the petitioner, having lost access to the GST portal upon cancellation, could be permitted to file the pending returns manually.
  3. Whether the revocation application deserved fresh consideration once the returns were filed.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Argued that non-receipt of payment from a government department for services rendered was the genuine reason for the delay in filing returns.
  • Pointed out that once GST registration is cancelled, returns cannot be uploaded electronically through the portal, so filing was practically impossible without the Court's intervention.
  • Sought the Court's permission to file the pending returns manually up to the date of cancellation, along with a fresh application for revocation of cancellation.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appeared for the respondents; the order does not record any specific opposition to the relief sought, the cancellation and rejection orders having rested squarely on the fact of non-filing of returns.

Court Order/Findings

  • Considering the petitioner's explanation, the Court permitted the petitioner to submit the pending returns manually, up to the date of cancellation, within two weeks, along with a fresh application for revocation of cancellation.
  • The Court directed the second respondent to consider the revocation application, once accompanied by the manually filed returns, and pass appropriate orders expeditiously — not later than one week from the date of submission.
  • The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, and any pending interlocutory applications were closed.

Important Clarification

  • Where the GST portal itself becomes inaccessible for filing returns after registration is cancelled, courts are willing to permit manual submission of returns to enable a genuine revocation application to go forward, rather than leaving the taxpayer in a procedural deadlock.
  • A bona fide explanation for the delay — such as non-receipt of payment from a government counterparty — can persuade a court to grant a short compliance window and a time-bound direction to the department, instead of relegating the taxpayer to a fresh, open-ended round of proceedings.

Sections Involved

  • Cancellation and revocation of GST registration, CGST/APGST Act, 2017 – the provisions (ordinarily Sections 29 and 30 of the Act) governing cancellation of registration for non-compliance and the procedure for seeking revocation of such cancellation, which formed the subject matter of both impugned orders.

Decision – In Favour of

The outcome favours the Assessee in substance, though it is a disposal with directions rather than a merits finding: the petitioner was permitted to cure the default by filing returns manually and was given a fresh, time-bound opportunity to have the revocation application considered, without the Court pronouncing on whether the original cancellation itself was legally correct.

Related Case Laws

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

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Amaravati)
  • Case No.: Writ Petition No.25902 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available on record
  • Coram: Hon'ble Sri Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao and Hon'ble Sri Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu
  • Decision Date: 10 October 2023
  • Disposal Nature: Disposed of – petitioner permitted to file returns manually and seek revocation of cancellation

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.