Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Sri Dulal Borgohain, proprietor of M/s Disang Enterprise, registered under the CGST/AGST Act (GSTIN 18AJKPB8357Q2ZE), had his registration cancelled by order dated 08.01.2020 for non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months, pursuant to a show cause notice bearing reference No. ZA1801200058150 dated 08.01.2020 which fixed a seven-day period for reply but did not notify any date for personal hearing. The petitioner claimed unfamiliarity with online procedures and could not reply in time; his subsequent appeal against the cancellation was dismissed on 09.07.2025 without being separately challenged. He thereafter approached the High Court seeking restoration.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner, despite an unchallenged dismissal of his statutory appeal, could still be granted relief in writ jurisdiction for restoration of GST registration cancelled under Section 29(2)(c).
  2. Whether the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, permitting the authority to drop cancellation proceedings on furnishing pending returns and full payment of dues, could be invoked at this stage.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner was ready and willing to comply with all formalities required under the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, i.e., to furnish all pending returns and pay the tax dues along with interest and late fee.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The respondents contended that the appeal preferred against the cancellation order had been dismissed and that order of dismissal had not been put to challenge in the present proceedings.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court set out Section 29(2)(c) of the Act and Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, noting that the proviso to sub-rule (4) permits the proper officer to drop cancellation proceedings and pass an order in Form GST REG-20 where the person, instead of merely replying to the show cause notice, furnishes all pending returns and makes full payment of tax dues along with applicable interest and late fee.
  • Relying on its earlier order in Sanjoy Nath v. The Union of India and others (WP(C) No.6366/2023), and considering that cancellation of registration entails serious civil consequences, the Court held that if the petitioner approached the empowered officer by furnishing all pending returns and making full payment of tax dues with interest and late fee, the officer could consider dropping the proceedings and passing an appropriate order.
  • The writ petition was disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the concerned authority within two months seeking restoration, upon which the authority shall consider the application in accordance with law and take steps for restoration expeditiously.
  • The Court clarified that the limitation period under Section 73(10) would be computed afresh from the date of this order (except for FY 2024-25, governed by Section 44), and that the order was passed in the interest of justice despite the appellate dismissal not having been specifically challenged.

Important Clarification

  • Even where the statutory appeal against a GST registration cancellation has been dismissed and not separately put to challenge, the High Court may still, in the interest of justice given the serious civil consequences of cancellation, permit the assessee to invoke the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules by furnishing pending returns and paying dues, and direct the authority to consider restoration.
  • Such relief typically comes with a caveat that the limitation period for future proceedings (such as under Section 73) will run afresh from the date of the restoration-facilitating order.

Sections Involved

  • Section 29(2)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — empowers cancellation of registration for continuous non-filing of returns for six months.
  • Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, particularly the proviso to sub-rule (4) — permits dropping cancellation proceedings on furnishing pending returns and full payment of dues.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of in favour of the Assessee, granting an opportunity to seek restoration of GST registration by complying with the proviso to Rule 22(4) within two months.

Case Details

Court: Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)
Case No.: WP(C)/4585/2025
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Date of Order: 12th August, 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.