Geli Bagra vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Geli Bagra, operating as M/s G B Enterprise, challenged the cancellation of his GST registration by the Superintendent of CGST, Pasighat Range. The cancellation, dated 26.12.2019, was based on the petitioner's failure to file GSTR-3B returns for over six consecutive months and non-response to GSTR-3A notices. The petitioner contended that he lost his login credentials after the cyber cafe where he registered his business closed down, preventing him from filing returns. He applied for new login credentials on 05.04.2025 and subsequently reset them on 06.05.2025. Following this, he filed all defaulted returns up to April 2020, along with applicable late fees and penalties.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner's case was squarely covered by the previous judgments in Krishanu Borthakur and Ms Yassung Yangfo. The reasoning was that the petitioner's inability to file returns was due to a technical issue (loss of login credentials) and that he had rectified the default by filing all outstanding returns and paying penalties once access was restored. Therefore, the cancellation of registration was deemed unjustified under these circumstances. The Court directed the Superintendent of CGST and CX Pasighat Range to revoke the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration. The petitioner was to be intimated of any outstanding statutory dues, and upon payment of these dues, his GST registration would be restored. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration is justified when the petitioner was unable to file returns due to loss of login credentials, and subsequently filed all defaulted returns with penalties after regaining access? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the inability to file returns was due to circumstances beyond his control, specifically the closure of the cyber cafe where he registered, leading to lost login credentials. He emphasized that upon regaining access, he diligently filed all outstanding returns and paid the requisite penalties. He relied on this Court's previous decisions in WP(C) 7057/2024 (Krishanu Borthakur Vs. Union of India) and WP(C) 70/2025 (Ms Yassung Yangfo Vs. The Union of India), where similar reliefs were granted. Revenue's arguments: The respondents, represented by the learned DSGI and Standing Counsel, CGST, fairly conceded that the cited cases would cover the petitioner's situation and agreed to a similar disposal of the writ petition.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 129
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
-O R D E R- 11.06.2025 Heard Mr. K. Tana, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Kato, learned DSGI and Mr. T. Kipa, learned Standing Counsel, CGST for the respondent nos.2 and 3. 2. Having considered the nature of issue involved in this petition and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this present writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage.
Challenge made in this writ petition is to the Order No.ZA120420000682E dated 26.12.2019 passed by the Superintendent of CGST Pasighat Range, Arunachal Pradesh, whereby, the GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that the petitioner assessee has stopped filing GSTR-3B returns for more than six consecutive months and also not responded to the GSTR-3A notice.
Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is that he has been carrying on a business under the name of M/S G.B. Enterprise with its principal place of business at Aalo, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh and has registered under Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 vide Registration No. 12BRIPB6944C1Z8 w.e.f. 27.01.2018. It is contended that since the petitioner through a cyber cafe registered himself as a proprietor under GST Act 2017, his login credentials was lost as the owner of the said cyber cafe has closed his shop and no proper address was known of the said cafe owner, due to which the petitioner could not file his GST returns. However, the petitioner submitted an application to the Superintendent of GST, for change of his login credentials on 05.04.2025. Page No.# 3/4
The petitioner was issued a show-cause notice on 26.12.2019 with regard to the cancellation for not filing the returns for a continuous period of six months. It is the contention of the petitioner that he was not able to access the GST portal and his e-mails. He was not aware of the notice and consequently failed to submit his reply and to take steps for filing the defaulted returns. The petitioner somehow reset his login credentials through the help of the Superintendent of CGST and CX Pasighat Range, finally on 06.05.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed all the defaulted returns up to April, 2020, i.e. up to the month in which his GST registration was cancelled including the late fines/ penalties required as per the law.
Mr. K. Tana, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the default returns which the petitioner has filed has been accepted by the GST authorities up to the date of cancellation including the penalties, the petitioner is ready to file the returns with the penalties to the remaining period, if the cancellation of the GST is revoked. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance of the orders of this Court passed in WP(C) 7057/2024 (Krishanu Borthakur Vs. Union of India) and (Ms Yassung Yangfo Vs. The Union of India) in WP(C) 70/2025 to submit that this Court has granted a similar relief to the petitioners in the above two cases and therefore, a similar relief may be granted to the present petitioner as the above two cases are squarely covered the case of the petitioner.
Mr. M. Kato, learned DSGI and Mr. T. Kipa, learned Standing Counsel, CGST for the respondent nos.2 and 3 have fairly submitted that the above two cases in fact would cover the case of the petitioner. Therefore, they jointly submit that the present writ petition may be disposed of granting the similar relief to the Page No.# 4/4 petitioner.
Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and having perused of the order dated 03.01.2025 and 24.02.2025 as well as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the orders dated 03.01.2025 and 24.02.2025 passed in Krishanu Borthakur (supra) and Ms Yassung Yangfo (supra) would cover the case of the petitioner and accordingly, the petitioner would be entitled to be provided with the similar relief as granted in the above two cases.
In view of above, this present writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the Superintendent of CGST and CX Pasighat Range, Arunachal Pradesh, shall revoke the cancellation of GST registration of the petitioner and shall intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues, standing in the name of the petitioner, if any. Upon payment of outstanding statutory dues, if any, under GST by the petitioner, the respondent authority shall pass appropriate order and restore the GST registration of the petitioner.
With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost.
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.