Facts of the Case

The petitioner, sole proprietor of M/S Arian Entertainment and registered under the CGST/AGST Act, 2017, was served a show-cause notice dated 11.10.2023 for non-filing of GST returns for a continuous period of six months, and her registration was cancelled by order dated 21.11.2023 for failure to reply or appear. She contended she was not conversant with the online procedure and discovered the notice only after time for reply and hearing had lapsed. She subsequently updated all pending returns up to November 2023 and discharged the GST dues along with late fee and interest, but her application for revocation of cancellation could not be filed as the 270-day statutory window under Rule 22 had already expired.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a taxpayer who has since filed all pending returns and paid all dues, interest and late fee, but has missed the statutory window for seeking revocation, can still be granted relief from cancellation of GST registration.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner was ready and willing to comply with all formalities required under the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.

Respondent's Arguments

  • None specifically opposing; the Finance & Taxation Department placed certain instructions on record.

Court Order / Findings

  • Under Section 29(2)(c), CGST Act, 2017, registration may be cancelled where returns have not been furnished for a continuous period of six months, and Rule 22 lays down the cancellation procedure, including the proviso to sub-rule (4) which permits the proper officer to drop proceedings where the taxpayer furnishes all pending returns and pays tax dues, interest and late fee.
  • Given that cancellation of registration entails serious civil consequences and that the petitioner was willing to fully comply with the proviso to Rule 22(4), the officer, duly empowered, has the authority to consider dropping the proceedings and restoring registration even beyond the ordinary revocation window, provided compliance is made.
  • The petition was disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the concerned authority within two months seeking restoration; on compliance, the authority was to pass necessary orders within an outer limit of 60 days.
  • The Court clarified that limitation under Section 73(10) would run afresh from the date of the order (except for FY 2024-25, governed by Section 44), and that the direction was confined to the facts of a first-time default, not to be treated as a precedent.

Important Clarification

  • Even after the 270-day statutory window for filing a revocation application under Rule 22 has lapsed, a taxpayer who furnishes all pending returns and discharges tax, interest and late fee in full may still be granted an opportunity to have the cancellation proceedings dropped, given the serious civil consequences of cancellation.
  • Such relief, when granted on the specific facts of a first-time default, is not intended to operate as a precedent for future defaults.

Sections Involved

  • Section 29(2)(c), CGST Act, 2017 -- cancellation of registration for continuous non-filing of returns for six months.
  • Rule 22, CGST Rules, 2017 -- procedure for cancellation of registration, including the proviso to sub-rule (4) permitting proceedings to be dropped on full compliance.
  • Section 73(10), CGST Act, 2017 -- limitation for issuance of orders under Section 73.

Decision – In Favour of

Assessee. The petitioner was given a fresh opportunity to seek restoration of registration by fully complying with Rule 22(4), despite the ordinary revocation window having lapsed.

Case Details

Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh); Case No. WP(C)/5351/2025; Coram: Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi; Order dated 14.10.2025.

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.