Pranjit Kr. Deka vs. The Union Of INDIA And Ors

WP(C)/817/2026HC GauhatiGSTCNR GAHC01002815202612 February 2026Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Pranjit Kr. Deka, proprietor of "Pran Electrical", is registered under the CGST Act, 2017. A Show Cause Notice was issued on March 12, 2024, for non-submission of returns as required by Section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017, and his registration was suspended. The petitioner claims he was unaware of this notice and did not file a reply. Consequently, Respondent No. 3 passed an order on May 6, 2024, cancelling the petitioner's registration without assigning any reason. The petitioner's application for revocation of cancellation, filed on August 23, 2024, was rejected on September 9, 2024. An appeal against this rejection was dismissed on June 25, 2025. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition before the High Court.

Held

The Court held that the issue involved in the instant proceedings was no longer res integra, referencing its prior decision in Motaleb Bhuyan Vs. The State Of Assam And Others. The Court found that similar directions as passed in paragraph 50 of the cited judgment could be applied here. Accordingly, the Court set aside and quashed the order of cancellation of registration dated May 6, 2024, and the order dated September 9, 2024, rejecting the revocation of cancellation. The petitioner was directed to file all pending returns within 30 days from the judgment date. The period stipulated in Section 73(10) of the CGST Act, 2017, for computation of penalties, etc., was to be computed from the date of the instant judgment, with an exception for the financial year 2025-26 as per Section 44. The petitioner was also held liable to pay arrears of tax, penalty, interest, and late fees.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order of cancellation of registration dated May 6, 2024, and the subsequent rejection of the revocation application on September 9, 2024, are liable to be set aside and quashed, considering the petitioner's claim of non-receipt of the Show Cause Notice and the lack of reasons in the cancellation order? (Question of law turning on Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that he was not aware of the Show Cause Notice and therefore could not file a reply. He also highlighted that the order cancelling his registration did not assign any reasons. The petitioner relied on the principles laid down in the case of Motaleb Bhuyan Vs. The State Of Assam And Others (2025) SCC OnLine Gau 1429, which dealt with similar issues. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents.

Sections Cited

Section 39, Section 29, Section 73(10), Section 44

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010028152026 2026:GAU-AS:2153 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/817/2026 PRANJIT KR. DEKA SON OF- LATE BHUBAN CHANDRA DEKA, R/O- JYOTINAGAR, WARD NO. 6, KARIMCHAWK, MANGALDAI, DIST- DARRANG, ASSAM- 784125 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ROOM NO.66A, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. 2:THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS 5TH FLOOR GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD MACHKHOWA GUWAHATI-781001. 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX MANGALDAI DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM. 4:THE JOINT COMMISSIONER DIBRUGARH DIBRUGARH ASSAM -786610 Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. M. Ahmed, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. C. Keyal, Standing Counsel · Date on which Judgment was reserved : N/A · Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 13.02.2026 · Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative Part of the Judgment : No · Whether the full Judgment has been Pronounced : Yes

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. A. M. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. S. C. Keyal, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. The Petitioner herein is aggrieved by the cancellation of his registration in terms with Section 39 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the CGST Act of 2017’). The Petitioner, thereupon, filed an application seeking revocation of the cancellation of the registration on 23.08.2024. However, the said application was rejected on 09.09.2024. The Petitioner then filed an appeal against the order dated 09.09.2024. The said Appeal was dismissed vide an order dated 25.06.2025. It is under such Page No.# 3/5 circumstances, the Petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition.

The materials on record reveal that the Petitioner herein is the proprietor of “Pran Electrical”. The Petitioner is registered under the provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the Act of 2017’). The Petitioner upon registration under the Act of 2017 was provided with the GSTIN Unique ID bearing No.18ATGPD3659P2Z3. 4. On account of non-submission of the returns, which is required in terms with Section 39 of the CGST Act of 2017 (which the Petitioner does not deny in the instant petition), a Show Cause Notice was issued on 12.03.2024 asking the Petitioner as to why his registration should not be cancelled. In addition to that, it was also mentioned that his registration shall stand suspended w.e.f. 12.03.2024 itself.

It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner was not aware of such notice and as such did not file any reply. The Respondent No.3 passed an order dated 06.05.2024 cancelling the registration of the Petitioner. No reason however was assigned.

The record also reveals that the Petitioner herein had sought

Page No.# 4/5 for revocation of the cancellation of the registration by filing an application, which was, however, rejected on 09.09.2024. The Petitioner thereupon preferred an appeal against the order dated 09.09.2024. The Appeal was dismissed vide an order dated 25.06.2025. 7. In this regard, this Court finds it very pertinent to take note of that the issue involved in the instant proceedings is no longer res- disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) The order of cancellation of registration dated 06.05.2024 as well as the dismissal of the revocation of the cancellation application vide order dated 09.09.2024 are set aside and quashed. (ii) The Petitioner herein is directed to file the returns for the Page No.# 5/5 entire period for which order of cancellation of registration was passed till date within 30 days from the date of the instant judgment. It is observed that if in the meantime, the Petitioner had submitted any return for any period, the directions passed in the instant Clause shall be restricted to the period when the Petitioner did not file the returns. (iii) The period as stipulated in Section 73(10) of the CGST Act of 2017 shall be computed from the date of the instant judgment, except for the financial year 2025-26, which shall be as per Section 44 of the CGST Act of 2017. (iv) The Petitioner herein also shall be liable to make payment of the arrears i.e. tax, penalty, interest and late fees.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant Bijoy Saha Saha Date: 2026.02.18 19:20:37 +05'30'

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.