The Gauhati High Court has provided relief to a trader reported under the GST whose registration had been suspended due to the failure to e-file GST returns for a period exceeding six months.
The court has ordered the GST officers to consider the possibility of withdrawing the suspension and restoring the registration delegation upon the assessee’s submission of outstanding returns and the settlement of all statutory dues.
A single-judge bench of Justice Kardak Ete said that when a taxpayer desires to comply with the GST norms, the authorities should analyse the request for restoration as per Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
M/s BSMD, a trader based in Basar, Arunachal Pradesh, has submitted the case whose GST registration was suspended via an order dated January 14, 2023, because of not filing the GST returns for exceeding than 6 consecutive months. The suspension was initiated u/s 29(2)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The applicant said that he was clueless about the SCN and the subsequent proceedings that led to the suspension. He said that the default was not intentional and emerged because of personal and financial issues. He travels frequently to Assam to take care of his elderly and unwell parents, which impacted his business operations and compliance with GST requirements.
The applicant mentioned that after awaring about the suspension, he tried submitting the due returns and clearing the outstanding obligations via the GST portal. However, because of the suspension of his registration, he was not able to finish the needed online compliances. Even after filing a representation for restoration, no measure was taken by the authorities.
The applicant in the hearing put reliance on earlier Gauhati High Court rulings, including Dug Rade v. Union of India and Mrs Bina Taipodia v. Union of India, where similar relief was provided to taxpayers encountering cancellation or suspension because of the return filing defaults.
The GST Department and the Union government considered that the case was covered by earlier decisions and agreed that similar relief could be furnished.
The Court observed that Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules includes a beneficial provision which permits authorities to drop cancellation proceedings if taxpayers submit due returns and pay applicable tax, interest, and late fees.
The Bench outlined that suspension or cancellation of GST registration has serious civil outcomes for businesses. Hence, when a taxpayer is willing to regularise defaults, authorities must regard restoration instead of continuing suspension mechanically.
The HC asked the applicant to file an application for revocation of suspension and restoration of registration within 20 days. The GST authorities were directed to analyse the application, validate compliance and take proper action as per the law.
| Case Title | Abdur Rezzak Vs Union of India |
| Case No. | WP(C)/328/2026 |
| Counsel For Petitioner | Minjum Kamcham, Bomnya Kamdak, Vijay Duku Raji, Tato Maying |
| Counsel For Respondent | Marto Kato, Tania Kipa |
| Gauhati High Court | Read Order |
