S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, S.T. Promotors, through its partner Senthilkumar, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 27.02.2026, issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, Madurai, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration. The cancellation was based on a show cause notice dated 08.12.2025, which cited the petitioner's failure to file GST monthly returns regularly. The petitioner sought quashing of the cancellation order, contending that it caused immense hardship and requested revocation. The respondent argued that the cancellation was justified due to non-filing of returns and that the petitioner should comply with conditions stipulated in a previous judgment.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition should be disposed of on the same terms as the judgment in Suguna Cutpiece v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST). This judgment provided a framework for the restoration of GST registration subject to several conditions. The petitioner is directed to file all pending returns prior to the cancellation, along with the tax dues, interest, and belated filing fees within 45 days. Payments are not to be made from Input Tax Credit (ITC). Any unutilized ITC will require scrutiny and approval by a competent officer before it can be used for future liabilities. The petitioner must also file returns and pay GST for the period subsequent to cancellation. Upon compliance, the registration shall be revived, and the respondents shall facilitate the filing of returns and payment through the GST portal within 30 days. The ratio is that consistent practice and judicial precedent should be followed for similar cases of GST registration cancellation due to non-filing of returns, provided the petitioner complies with specific remedial measures.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns is justified, and if so, what is the appropriate relief. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the provisions related to GST registration and cancellation). Petitioner's contention: The cancellation of GST registration is causing immense hardship, and the registration should be revoked. The petitioner relies on the judgment in Suguna Cutpiece v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST), W.P.Nos.25048 of 2021 batch. Respondent's contention: The GST registration was cancelled due to the petitioner not filing returns regularly. The order in Suguna Cutpiece was conditional, and the petitioner should be directed to comply with all stipulated conditions.