Sri Nishitendu Das vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors
Held
The Court noted that an appealable remedy under Section 112 of the CGST Act was available to the petitioner against the order dated April 10, 2026, which dismissed his appeal under Section 107. The respondents confirmed that the period of limitation for filing such an appeal under Section 112 was still available to the petitioner, extending up to July 31, 2026. In light of this, the petitioner's counsel fairly conceded that they were not pressing the writ petition as an appellate remedy. The Court, therefore, did not entertain the writ petition, explicitly reserving the petitioner's liberty to avail the statutory appellate remedy available under the law. The Court's decision was based on the existence of an efficacious alternative remedy.
Facts
The petitioner, Sri Nishitendu Das, had his GST registration cancelled by the Proper Officer on August 16, 2023, citing non-filing of returns for six months under Section 39 of the CGST Act. The petitioner's subsequent attempt to file a revocation application was disallowed due to the expiry of the limitation period. An appeal filed against the cancellation order under Section 107 of the CGST Act was dismissed on April 10, 2026, as time-barred. Consequently, the petitioner filed the present writ petition before the High Court challenging the cancellation order and the dismissal of the appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act is available to the petitioner? The petitioner's primary contention, as implied by filing the writ petition, was that the cancellation order was passed without reason and that the subsequent appeal was dismissed. The respondents, represented by the Principal Commissioner, Additional Commissioner (Appeals), and Superintendent of CGST, argued that an order passed in appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act is further appealable under Section 112 of the CGST Act. They contended that the petitioner still had time to file an appeal under Section 112 and that approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution was premature and therefore, the writ petition should not be entertained.
Sections Cited
Section 39, Section 107, Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No. 1/3 GAHC010150082026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3924/2026 SRI NISHITENDU DAS SON OF NIRMAL KUMAR DAS, HOUSE NO. 15, 1ST LINK ROAD, LANE NO. 1, UTTAR KRISHNAPUR, PART-II, P.O. SILCHAR, AND P.S. RANGIRKHARI POLICE STATION, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM, 788006. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ROOM NO. 66, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110001. 2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS 5TH FLOOR GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD MACHKHOWA GUWAHATI -781001. 3:THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CGST CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS 3RD FLOOR GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD MACHKHOWA GUWAHATI- 781001 ASSAM. 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX SILCHAR II RANGE
Page No. 2/3 GUWAHATI-D-1 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R S MISHRA, MS. M DEY,MS B SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, GST
BEFO
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.