The Gauhati High Court granted relief to LUKNU BUCHI ENTERPRISES, a proprietorship firm, after its GST registration was cancelled due to non-filing of GSTR-3B return. Justice Kardak Ete issued the order regarding the case of Smti Bina Taipodia vs. Union of India and Others on May 18, 2026.
The applicant, Smti Bina Taipodia, proprietor of Luknu Buchi Enterprises based in Lower Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, contested the cancellation of GST registration bearing GSTIN 12CBPPT8479Q1ZC. The Superintendent of the CGST and SGST Department, Pasighat Range, cancelled the registration via an order on May 29, 2025, for failure to file GST returns.
The applicant before the Court stated that she never obtained the SCN issued on October 7, 2024, and thus could not answer to it. It was claimed that no intention was there to evade GST payment or breach GST norms. As per the applicant, health-related issues averted the timely filing of returns and tax payments. The applicant before the Court expressed that the pending tax dues had been paid on April 23, 2026.
HC said that a similar case had earlier been decided in the taxpayer’s favour, where pending GST returns, tax dues, interest, and penalties were cleared thereafter. The Court referred to earlier judgments, along with Dug Rade vs Union of India and Pankaj Mohan vs Union of India, which held that authorities may restore GST registration if taxpayers adhere to the provision under Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
The Court, while putting reliance on those precedents, asked the applicant to file an application for restoration of GST registration before the concerned authorities within 20 days from the order date. Thereafter, CGST authorities were asked to validate the application and restore the GST registration subject to the law within 4 weeks.
Read Also: How GST Software Helps Protect Your Business from Cancellation
Courts are still granting relief in legitimate GST registration cancellations if taxpayers settle outstanding returns and payments, especially if deliberate tax evasion isn’t evident.
| Case Title | Smti Bina Taipodia vs The Union of India and 2 Ors represented by the Secretary |
| Case No. | WP(C)/212/2026 |
| For Petitioner | Jambey Tsering Kee, Tsering Gyatso, Dejum Tally, Tayom |
| For Respondent | Marto Kato, SC Central Excise and Customs, Tania Kipa, DSGI |
| Gauhati High Court | Read Order |
