Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 Ors
Facts
The petitioner, Jashwant Sharma, is engaged in the business of a Manpower Recruitment Agency and is registered under the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled on 13.05.2024 due to non-submission of returns. A show cause notice for cancellation was issued on 05.02.2024. The petitioner claims to have had no knowledge of the cancellation until attempting to enroll in government schemes. Upon learning of the cancellation, the petitioner filed returns seeking revocation, but the GST portal disallowed it due to the expiry of the 270-day time limit for filing revocation applications. The petitioner then approached the High Court via a writ petition.
Held
The Court held that the facts of the present case were similar to those in the case of Motaleb Bhuyan Vs. The State of Assam and Ors. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to similar reliefs. The Court set aside and quashed the order of cancellation of registration dated 13.05.2024. The petitioner was directed to file all pending returns from the date of failure to file until the present date within 30 days of the order. The time period stipulated in Section 73(10)/74(10) of the CGST Act, 2017/AGST Act, 2017 was to be computed from the date of the instant order, with an exception for the financial year 2026-27 as per Section 44. The petitioner was also directed to pay arrears of tax, penalty, interest, and late fees.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order of cancellation of registration dated 13.05.2024 is liable to be set aside on the grounds that the show cause notice dated 05.02.2024 and the cancellation order itself were vague and lacked specific reasons as required under Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that both the show cause notice and the cancellation order failed to provide specific reasons for the cancellation, making them vague. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in this regard. 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to revocation of registration cancellation despite the expiry of the statutory time limit for filing the revocation application, given the circumstances of the case? The petitioner contended that they were unaware of the cancellation and that the GST portal's refusal to accept the revocation application was unjust. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in this regard.
Sections Cited
Section 29, Section 39, Section 73, Section 74, Section 44
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010232872026
2026:GAU-AS:15751
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5751/2026 JASHWANT SHARMA SON OF BHAGAWAN SHARMA, R.O- BOKAJAN WARD NO-1, P.O. AND P.S.- BOKAJAN, DIPHU, DIST- KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM-782490 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND A4 ORS REPRESENTED BY BY THE SECRETARY OF GOVERMENT OF INDIA , MINISTRY OF FINANCE NEW DELHI 2:The Principal Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tex GST BHAWAN GUWAHATI ASSAM 3:THE JURI ICTION OFFICER SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX CBIC GUWAHATI-D-1 DIPHU RANGE-II-C 4:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY COMMISSIONER AND SEC. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPT. OF FINANCE AND TAXATION DISPUR ASSAM
Page No.# 2/6 5:The Principal Commissioner State Goods And Services Tex KAR BHAWAN GUWAHATI ASSA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Advocate for the petitioner (s) : Ms. B. Sarmah, Advocate
Advocate for the respondent (s): Mr. S. C. Keyal, Sr. Advocate & SC, Central Excise
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.