Sri Champak Borah vs. The State Of Assam And 3 Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sri Champak Borah, an assessee registered under the GST Act, 2017, failed to file GST returns for six consecutive months due to personal problems. Consequently, the Jurisdiction Officer/Assistant Officer of State Tax (Respondent No. 4) issued a show cause notice on August 13, 2024, proposing cancellation of his GST registration. The registration was cancelled by order dated October 30, 2024, effective from August 13, 2024. The petitioner's attempt to file for revocation was unsuccessful due to the elapsed time limit. An appeal against the cancellation order was dismissed as time-barred by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals) (Respondent No. 3) on December 9, 2025. The petitioner then approached the High Court via a writ petition.
Held
The Court held that the cancellation of GST registration, especially when it prevents an assessee from complying with statutory obligations to pay taxes, is not in the interest of revenue. The Court noted that similar matters, where appeals were rejected as time-barred, had been disposed of by this Court and other Co-ordinate Benches with directions to revoke the cancellation upon payment of all statutory dues. Following these precedents, the Court interfered with the impugned order of cancellation dated October 30, 2024. The Jurisdiction Officer/Assistant Officer of State Tax (Respondent No. 4) was directed to intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues till the date of cancellation. Upon payment of these dues by the petitioner, the respondent authority is to pass appropriate orders revoking the cancellation and restoring the petitioner's GST registration. The Court explicitly stated that it would serve no purpose to keep the writ petition pending, given the consistent approach of other benches in similar cases. The issue of whether the petitioner's initial failure to file returns was sufficiently justified was not expressly decided, but the focus was on restoring compliance.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration for non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months, and the subsequent dismissal of the appeal as time-barred, warrants interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, considering the petitioner's inability to file for revocation within the prescribed time limit? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that due to personal problems, returns were not filed, leading to cancellation. The time limit for revocation had elapsed, and the appeal was dismissed as time-barred. The petitioner relied on various orders passed by Co-ordinate Benches of the High Court directing the restoration of GST registration upon payment of dues in similar circumstances. Revenue's Argument: The Standing Counsel for the Finance and Taxation Department did not dispute the position that Co-ordinate Benches have passed orders directing the restoration of GST registration upon complete payment of all dues, if any.
Sections Cited
Section 107, GST Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 28.01.2026
Heard Mr. R. S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B Chowdhury, learned Standing Counsel for the Finance and Taxation Department.
The petitioner is engaged in execution of works contract and is an assessee registered under the provision of GST Act, 2017 and has GST Registration being Registration No. 18ARJPB7710L2ZM.
Pursuant to being registered under the GST Act, the petitioner has been regularly submitting his GST returns. However, due to several personal problems his GST returns could not be submitted for a continuous period of 6 (six) months. On 13.08.2024, the respondent No. 4 issued a show cause notice on the petitioner to show cause as to why the GST registration should not be cancelled for not filing the returns for a continuous period of 6 months. The reply was directed to be submitted within 30 days from the date of service of notice.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by order dated 30.10.2024 under reference No. ZA181024070461X the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled. The effective date of cancellation was 13.08.2024. The Page No.# 3/5 petitioner thereafter, tried to file necessary application seeking revocation of GST cancellation however, the same could not be filed as the time limit prescribed for filing of revocation application had elapsed. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal against the impugned order of cancellation dated 30.10.2024 under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. However, the said appeal also came to be dismissed as being time barred by the Appellate Authority, namely, respondent No. 3 vide order dated 09.12.2025, which is also impugned in the writ petition.The petitioner having no other alternative has approached this Court instead of preferring the appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to various orders passed by the Co- ordinate Benches too, whereby this Court had passed orders for restoration of the GST registration.
Mr B Chowdhury, learned Standing Counsel, Finance and Taxation Department, however, does not dispute the position that orders have been passed by the Co-ordinate Benches directing the restoration of GST Registration upon complete payment of all dues, if any.
The learned counsels for the parties have been heard. Pleadings available on record have also been perused.
The petitioner is engaged in the business of providing Works Contract
Page No.# 4/5 Services. Under the GST regime, the petitioner was required to pay the necessary dues under the CGST or SGST. These statutory dues are required to be paid by all entities who are registered under the GST regime. Such payments of statutory due(s) contribute towards the revenue collection by the Union. If the petitioner is not included within the GST regime, then any statutory dues that may be required to be deposited by the petitioner will not be deposited and which will not be in the interest of the revenue. Therefore, in order that the petitioner is required to comply with his statutory obligations of payment of taxes under the GST regime, it would be necessary for the departmental authorities to re-consider the prayer of the petitioner for revocation of his cancellation of GST registration.
It is submitted at the bar that there are several orders passed by this Court as well as by other Co-ordinate Benches in similar matters whereby the matters have been disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to revoke the cancellation of registration upon due payment of all statutory dues payable by the petitioners. In some matters, the assessee had approached the statutory appellate authority for redressal of their grievances which however, was rejected by the appellate authority. This Court is therefore of the view that since similar such orders have been passed by this Court as well as other Co-ordinate Benches, it will serve no purpose to keep the present writ petition pending. This Page No.# 5/5 present writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of similar orders as had been done by the orders passed in W.P(C) No. 6930/2023, W.P(C) No. 1049/2023, WP(C) No.5181/2023 and WP(C) No.6366/2023. 9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.10.2024 is hereby interfered with and set aside. It is directed that the Respondent No. 4, namely, the Juri iction Officer/Assistant Officer of the State Tax, Guwahati will intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues, if any, standing in the name of the petitioner till the date of cancellation of his GST registration. Upon such intimation, if any such outstanding statutory dues under GST are required to be paid, the same shall be deposited by the petitioner without fail. Upon such payment of statutory dues under the GST by the petitioner, the respondent authority will pass appropriate orders and revoke the cancellation by restoring the GST registration of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition stand disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
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.