Biki Tania vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Biki Tania, operating M/s Tatum and Yami Enterprise, had his GST registration cancelled on 21.01.2025 by the Superintendent of CGST, Itanagar Range. This cancellation was due to non-furnishing of GST returns for a continuous period of six months, following a system-generated Show Cause Notice dated 17.12.2024. The petitioner cited financial constraints as the reason for his inability to file returns and respond to the notice. He approached the High Court seeking a direction to revoke the cancellation, as the statutory period for revocation had expired, and filing subsequent returns was restricted.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner was entitled to similar relief as granted in prior similar cases. The Court directed the Superintendent of CGST, Itanagar Range, to first intimate the petitioner of his total statutory outstanding dues, including any penalties or fines, as of the date of registration cancellation and restoration. Subsequently, the petitioner was to pay these dues within 30 days of receiving the intimation. Upon proof of payment, the Superintendent was to revoke the cancellation order dated 21.01.2025 and restore the petitioner's GST registration. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to revocation of his GST registration cancellation, despite the expiry of the statutory period for revocation and restrictions on filing past due returns, considering his inability to comply due to financial constraints? The petitioner argued that since the statutory period for revocation had expired and there were restrictions on filing returns beyond three years from the due date, he was unable to regularize his GST compliance through the portal. He contended that his case was similar to other cases where the High Court had granted conditional relief, directing revocation subject to payment of all dues. The petitioner prayed for similar relief. The respondents (Union of India, Commissioner of Tax and Excise, Commissioner of CGST, and Superintendent of CGST) fairly submitted that the issue was similar to previously decided matters and they had no objection to a similar direction being passed in the present writ petition.
Sections Cited
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Date : 01-10-2026 Heard Mr. D. Pullo, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Sora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned Dy.S.G.I. for respondent No. 1; Ms. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 and Mr. H. Aape, learned Standing Counsel, CGST, appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself.
By filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to revoke the cancellation of Registration, dated 21.01.2025, issued by the Superintendent of CGST, Itanagar Range.
The case of the petitioner is that he is carrying on business of construction work agency and Government order supply under the name and style of M/s Tatum and Yami Enterprises, bearing Registration No. 12BSXPT2971B1ZG, under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 with effect from 19.04.2023, having its principal place of business at Joram-Koloriang Road, Palin Kra Daadi District, Arunachal Pradesh.
Page No.# 3/5
It is the case of the petitioner that due to financial constraints he could not continue his business activities and consequently failed to file GST returns. A system generated Show Cause Notice dated 17.12.2024 was thereafter issued to the petitioner through GST portal on the ground of non-furnishing of returns for a continuous period of six months. By the said notice, the petitioner was directed to submit his reply within 30 (thirty) days from the date of service thereof and to appear before the juri ictional officer on 14.01.2025. Simultaneously, the GST registration of the petitioner was suspended with immediate effect.
It is the further case of the petitioner that he could neither submit his reply nor take steps to file the defaulted returns, vide the impugned order dated 21.01.2025, the GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled on account of non-filing of returns.
Mr. Pullo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the cancellation order was passed on 21.01.2025 and the statutory period for seeking revocation has already expired, coupled with the restriction on filing returns after the expiry of three years from the due date, the petitioner is presently unable to file the pending returns and discharge his tax liabilities through the GST portal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, has referred to certain orders passed in similar cases wherein, this Court has passed conditional order by directing the respondent authorities to revoke the cancellation of the GST registration, subject to full payment of all the dues and accordingly submit that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the said orders. Therefore, he prays that a similar relief may be provided to the petitioner.
Page No.# 4/5
Mr. N. Sora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned Dy.S.G.I for respondent No. 1; Ms. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for respondent No. 2 and Mr. H. Aape, learned Standing Counsel, CGST, for respondent nos. 3 & 4, fairly submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition is similar to the one considered in similar matters decided by this Court. Therefore, they submit that they would have no objection if a similar direction is passed in this present writ petition also.
I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the order dated 09.09.2026, passed in WP(C) No. 430 of 2026. 11. Having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the orders passed in similar matters this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled for similar relief.
Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed with the following directions: i) The Superintendent of CGST, Itanagar Range GST (respondent No.4), shall intimate the petitioner with regard to his total statutory outstanding dues, if any, in the name of the petitioner having trade name of M/s Tatum and Yami Enterprises till the date of cancellation of the GST registration and any penalty/fine as may be found due as on the date of restoration of the GST registration so as to enable the petitioner to make payment of the entire statutory dues under CGST Act. ii) The petitioner thereafter, shall make the payment of the dues within 30 (thirty) days from the date of receipt of such intimation from the competent authority.
Page No.# 5/5 iii) Upon receipt of proof of payment made within the stipulated time allowed being submitted, the respondent No. 4 shall pass an appropriate order to revoke the order dated 21.01.2025 and restore the GST registration of the petitioner.
The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of in terms of above. JUDGE CHECKED & VERIFIED 16:34:21 +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.