Facts of the Case: Smti Jinny Daimary, proprietor of M/s J. P. Enterprise and a registered assessee under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017/Assam GST Act, 2017 (GSTIN 18AVDPD6524G1ZS), was served a Show Cause Notice dated 12.04.2023 for non-filing of GST returns for a continuous period of six months. She failed to reply or appear for personal hearing within the stipulated time, being unfamiliar with the online portal, and the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Nalbari-1 cancelled her registration by order dated 02.06.2023 under Section 29(2)(c). After recovering from losses caused by a fire at her business premises, she updated all pending returns up to March 2023 and cleared her dues along with interest and late fees. However, by the time she attempted to file for revocation, the 270-day limitation window had lapsed, and the GST portal refused her application. She then approached the Gauhati High Court under Article 226.

Issues Involved:

  1. Whether a GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns can still be restored after the statutory 270-day window for seeking revocation has expired.
  2. Whether the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 entitles a compliant assessee to restoration despite the delay.

Petitioner's Arguments:

  • The petitioner was ready and willing to comply with all formalities under the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
  • Non-filing arose from genuine hardship — a fire at her business premises and unfamiliarity with the online portal — and not wilful default.
  • She had already filed all pending returns and discharged tax, interest and late fees before approaching the Court.

Respondent's Arguments:

  • The State's Standing Counsel for Finance and Taxation did not seriously contest the relief, given that similarly situated petitioners had already been granted comparable relief by the Court in earlier orders.

Court Order / Findings:

  • The Court examined Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, noting that its proviso to sub-rule (4) permits the proper officer to drop cancellation proceedings and pass an order in Form GST REG-20 where the assessee furnishes all pending returns and pays tax dues with interest and late fee.
  • Relying on its own coordinate-bench orders in Sanjoy Nath v. Union of India and Dipjyoti Borah v. State of Assam, the Court held that cancellation of GST registration entails serious civil consequences, warranting a liberal approach where the assessee is willing to comply.
  • The writ petition was disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the concerned authority within two months seeking restoration; on compliance, the authority must decide within an outer limit of 60 days.

Important Clarification:

  • Expiry of the statutory time limit to apply for revocation of cancellation is not necessarily fatal where the assessee demonstrates genuine willingness to cure the default by filing returns and clearing all dues — courts may direct the authority to entertain a fresh restoration request under the Rule 22(4) proviso.
  • The limitation period under Section 73(10) for the relevant tax periods is to be computed afresh from the date of the Court's order (save for FY 2024-25, governed by Section 44).

Sections Involved:

  • Section 29(2)(c), CGST Act, 2017 — cancellation of registration for non-filing of returns for six continuous months.
  • Rule 22, CGST Rules, 2017 — procedure for cancellation and the proviso permitting revival on compliance.
  • Section 73(10), CGST Act, 2017 — limitation for passing orders for recovery of tax.

Decision – In Favour of: Assessee, subject to compliance with conditions (filing of returns and payment of tax, interest, penalty and late fees).

Case Details: Gauhati High Court; Case No. WP(C)/3572/2025; CNR GAHC010137272025 (2025:GAU-AS:9531); Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair; Date of Order: 24.07.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.