GST Registration Cancelled Due to Consultant’s Negligence Can Be Restored After Payment of Dues: Gauhati HC [Read Order]

Gauhati: The Gauhati High Court has held that a GST registration cancelled on account of non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months, caused by the negligence of the petitioner’s tax consultant, can be restored if the petitioner furnishes all pending returns and pays all dues, including tax, interest, and late fees, following the procedure prescribed under Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.

Justice Kardak Ete passed the order on June 1, 2026, in WP(C) No. 2789 of 2026, filed by Md. Nekib Hussain, a proprietor engaged in the business of execution of works contract services under the name M/s Nekib Hussain in Goalpara, Assam, against the cancellation of his GST registration by the Superintendent, CGST, Dhaligaon Range, Goalpara-2, by order dated March 9, 2023.

Background

The petitioner was duly registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He contended that due to the fault of his tax consultant, who had never informed him about his non-compliance with the provisions of the CGST and AGST Acts, GST returns were not filed for a continuous period of six months. A show cause notice was issued on January 15, 2023, requiring a reply within 30 days and directing him to appear on February 13, 2023. The GST registration was suspended with effect from January 15, 2023, and subsequently cancelled on March 9, 2023, without assigning any reason.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the cancellation, the petitioner attempted to file an application for revocation of the cancellation but could not do so because the prescribed time limit had elapsed. He also attempted to file the pending GST returns but was prevented from doing so due to restrictions on the GST portal. The petitioner stated his readiness and willingness to comply with all formalities as per the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017.

The petitioner placed reliance on an earlier judgment of a coordinate bench of the Gauhati High Court dated October 17, 2025, in Dhirghat Hardware Stores and Another v. Union of India and Three Others, in WP(C) No. 5944 of 2025, rendered on similar facts and law. Counsel for the CGST fairly conceded that the Dhirghat Hardware Stores judgment would cover the case of the present petitioner.

Court’s Findings

The court noted that the coordinate bench in Dhirghat Hardware Stores had held that under the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, if a person served with a show cause notice under Section 29(2)(c) of the Act is ready and willing to furnish all pending returns and make full payment of tax dues along with applicable interest and late fees, the empowered officer may drop the proceedings and pass an order in Form GST REG-20. The court held that this position would squarely cover the case of the present petitioner.

Directions

The court directed the petitioner to approach the concerned authority within 60 days from the date of the order seeking restoration of his GST registration. If the petitioner submits an application, furnishes pending GST returns, and complies with all requirements under the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, the concerned authority shall consider the application and take the necessary steps for restoration of the GST registration as expeditiously as possible.

The court further directed that the period stipulated under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act and the State GST Act shall be computed from the date of the order, except for the financial year 2024–25, which shall be governed as per Section 44 of the CGST Act. The petitioner shall also make payment of arrears, including tax, penalty, interest, and late fees.

The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

Case Details

• Case Title: Md. Nekib Hussain v. The Union of India and Others
• Case Number: WP(C) No. 2789 of 2026
• Neutral Citation: 2026:GAU-AS:7558
• Court: Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)
• Judge: Justice Kardak Ete
• Date of Order: June 1, 2026
• Petitioner’s Advocates: Mr. R.S. Mishra, Ms. B. Sarma, Ms. M. Dey
• Respondents’ Advocate: Mr. K. Jain for Mr. S.C. Keyal, Standing Counsel, CGST.

[Read Order]