M/S. Ar Enterprises vs. The State Of Telangana

Held

The Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances, inclined to allow the petitioner liberty to approach the competent authority within two weeks from the date of the order for submission of an application for revocation of cancellation of GST registration in physical form. The competent authority was directed to entertain the application and take a decision in accordance with law within three weeks thereafter. The writ petition was disposed of with this direction. The Court did not explicitly decide on the legality or arbitrariness of the cancellation order itself, but provided a procedural remedy. The ratio decidendi is that in such cases, the petitioner should be given an opportunity to approach the competent authority for revocation, and the authority should decide the matter expeditiously.

Facts

M/s. AR Enterprises (the petitioner) filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of its GST registration. The cancellation order, issued by the Assistant Commissioner (3rd respondent) on 03.09.2026, was based on a show-cause notice-cum-order dated 07.08.2026. The grounds for cancellation were that the registration was obtained by fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts, and that the petitioner was not conducting any business from the declared place of business. The petitioner sought to declare these orders illegal and arbitrary, and to restore its GST registration. The respondents are the State of Telangana and its tax authorities.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order of cancellation of GST registration, issued by the 3rd respondent, is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violative of the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and rules thereunder, as contended by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the restoration of its GST registration with consequential benefits, as prayed for? The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violative of natural justice and specific provisions of the CGST Act and Constitution of India. The petitioner sought setting aside of the cancellation and restoration of registration. The respondents, represented by the Special Government Pleader for State Tax, submitted that the cancellation was based on the grounds of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts, and non-commencement of business from the declared place.