M/S. Savvy S Constructions vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer

Held

The High Court acknowledged the petitioner's submission that the non-filing of returns was due to circumstances beyond their control, specifically the illness of a partner and the absence of the accountant. The Court also noted the petitioner's inability to file a revocation application manually due to the GST portal's time limitations. Considering these factors, the Court directed that if the petitioner approaches the competent authority within one week from the date of the order for submission of a revocation application in physical form, the competent authority shall entertain it. The competent authority is then directed to take a decision on the application in accordance with the law within three weeks thereafter. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs. The Court did not explicitly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Sawy S Constructions, had its GST registration certificate (No. 36ACIFS4630GZZ2) cancelled by the Deputy State Tax Officer (1st Respondent) on January 21, 2024, for failing to file returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner filed an appeal against this cancellation, which was dismissed by the 2nd Respondent on November 29, 2025, as time-barred. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking revocation of the cancellation. The petitioner contended that the non-filing of returns was due to a partner's illness and the accountant's absence, leading to an unintentional delay and lack of awareness of the show cause notice. They also stated that the GST portal did not permit manual submission of the revocation application due to time limitations.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration certificate was arbitrary and illegal, considering the reasons for non-filing of returns and the inability to file a revocation application manually due to portal limitations? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the non-filing of returns was unintentional, caused by the illness of a key partner and the accountant's absence. They claimed there were no outstanding GST dues. The petitioner further contended that the GST portal's time restrictions prevented them from filing a manual revocation application, necessitating judicial intervention. They relied on the principle that genuine reasons for non-compliance should be considered. Revenue's arguments: The Special Government Pleader for State Tax stated they had no instructions regarding the petitioner's assertion of no outstanding dues. However, they confirmed that the cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to file returns for six consecutive months.