Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/6 vs The Union Of India And 2 Ors on 6 June, 2025
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010122292025
2025:GAU-AS:7434
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3149/2025
DEBASISH BORUAH
S/O. LT. MNIN BORUAH, R/O. KAKODUNGA HABIGAON, P/O. BORHOLLA,
P/S. URANGIAL, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785631.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS.
REP. BY THE SECRETARY OF GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
NEW DELHI-110001
2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE
TAX
GST BHWAN KEDAR ROAD
GUWAHATI
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
JORHAT-1
JORHAT DIVISIO
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R S MISHRA, MS M NIROLA,MR. A K GUPTA
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, GST
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 06.06.2025
1. Heard Mr. R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is an Assesee
Page No.# 2/6
registered under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax
(CGST) Act, 2017/Assam Goods and Services Tax (AGST) Act, 2017
bearing registration No. 18AXDPB6784C2ZJ and because of non-filing
of GST returns for a continuous period of six months, the petitioner
was served with a show cause notice bearing reference No.
ZA181123011097Z dated 13.11.2023 asking him to furnish reply to
the aforesaid notice within a period 30 (thirty) days from the date of
service of notice and it was mentioned in the aforesaid show cause
notice that if the petitioner fails to furnish a reply within the stipulated
date or fail to appear for personal hearing on the appointed date and
time, the case will be decided ex-parte on the basis of the available
records and on merits. However, no date for personal hearing was
ever notified. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 24.04.2024 was
issued by the Superintendent, Jorhat-1, respondent No.3, cancelling
GST registration of the petitioner for not furnishing returns for a
continuous period of 6 (six) or more months.
3. Thereafter, the petitioner tried to file the necessary
application seeking revocation of GST cancellation, however, the same
could not be filed as the time limit prescribed for filing of revocation
application was elapsed.
4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by
filing the present writ petition.
5. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
has submitted that due to reasons beyond his control, the petitioner
could not submit the returns required to be submitted under Section
39(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 for a period of about 6 (six) months or
Page No.# 3/6
more. However, he has submitted that the petitioner is ready and
willing to comply with all the formalities required as per proviso to
sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
6. As per Section 29(2)(c), an officer, duly empowered, may
cancel the GST registration of a person from such date, including any
retrospective date, as he deems fit, where any registered person, has
not furnished returns for a continuous period of 6 (six) months. Rule
22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 has laid down the procedure for
cancellation of the registration.
7. Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 being bone of contention
is quoted herein below:-
Rule 22 : Cancellation of Registration
(1) Where the proper officer has reasons to believe that the
registration of a person is liable to be cancelled under
Section 29, he shall issue a notice to such person in FORM
GST REG-17, requiring him to show cause, within a period of
seven working days from the date of the service of such
notice, as to why his registration shall not be cancelled.
(2) The reply to the show cause notice issued under sub-rule
[1] shall be furnished in FORM REG-18 within the period
specified in the said sub-rule.
(3) Where a person who has submitted an application for
cancellation of his registration is no longer liable to be
registered or his registration is liable to be cancelled, the
proper officer shall issue an order in FORM GST REG-19,
within a period of thirty days from the date of application
submitted under Rule 20 or, as the case may be, the date of
the reply to the show cause issued under sub-rule [1], [or
Page No.# 4/6
under sub-rule (2A) of Rule 21A] cancel the registration,
with effect from a date to be determined by him and notify
the taxable person, directing him to pay arrears of any tax,
interest or penalty including the amount liable to be paid
under sub-section [5] of Section 29.
(4) Where the reply furnished under sub-rule [2] [or in
response to the notice issued under sub-rule (2A) of Rule
21A] is found to be satisfactory, the proper officer shall drop
the proceedings and pass an order in FORM GST REG-20 :
Provided that where the person instead of replying to the
notice served under sub rule [1] for contravention of the
provisions contained in Clause [b] or Clause [c] of sub-
section [2] of section 29, furnishes all the pending returns
and makes full payment of the tax dues along with
applicable interest and late fee, the proper officer shall drop
the proceedings and pass an order in FORM GST REG-20.
(5) The provisions of sub-rule [3] shall, mutatis mutandis,
apply to the legal heirs of a deceased proprietor, as if the
application had been submitted by the proprietor himself.
8. It is discernible from a reading of the proviso to sub-rule
(4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules 2017 that if a person, who has been
served with a show cause notice under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST
Act, 2017, is ready and willing to furnish all the pending returns and
to make full payment of the tax itself along with applicable interest
and late fee, the officer, duly empowered, can drop the proceedings
and pass an order in the prescribed Form i.e. Form GST REG-20.
9. The learned counsel for the parties have also referred to
an Order dated 11.10.2023 passed in a writ petition, W.P.(C) No.
6366/2023 (Sanjoy Nath vs. The Union of India and others)
wherein the petitioner therein was similarly situated like the present
Page No.# 5/6
petitioner.
10. Having regard to the fact that the GST registration of the
petitioner has been cancelled under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act,
2017 for the reason that the petitioner did not submit returns for a
period of 6 (six) months and more; and the provisions contained in
the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 and
cancellation of registration entails serious civil consequences, this
Court is of the considered view that in the event the petitioner
approaches the officer, duly empowered, by furnishing all the pending
returns and make full payment of the tax dues, along with applicable
interest and late fee, the officer duly empowered, has the authority
and jurisdiction to drop the proceedings and pass an order in the
prescribed Form.
11. In such view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of
by providing that the petitioner shall approach the concerned
authority within a period of 2 (two) months from today seeking
restoration of his GST registration. If the petitioner submits such an
application and complies with all the requirements as provided in the
proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the
concerned authority shall consider the application of the petitioner for
restoration of his GST registration in accordance with law and shall
take necessary steps for restoration of GST registration of the
petitioner as expeditiously as possible.
12. With the observations made and the direction given above,
the writ petition is disposed of. No cost.
13. It is needless to say that the period as stipulated under
Page No.# 6/6
Section 73 (10) of the Central Gst Act/State GST Act shall be
computed from the date of the instant judgment, except for the
financial year 2024-25, which shall be as per Section 44 of the Central
GST Act/State GST Act. The petitioner herein also be liable to make
payment of arrears i.e. tax, penalty, interest and late fees.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
