Gauhati High Court Allows GST Registration Revival Subject to Filing Returns and Clearing Dues:

The Gauhati HC directed the concerned tax authorities to consider the GST revocation application if the taxpayer furnishes all his pending GST returns and clears dues.
HC Considers Taxpayer's Claim of Non-Filing GST Returns Due to Consultant’s Negligence

Gauhati High Court Allows GST Registration Revival Subject to Filing Returns and Clearing Dues
The Gauhati High Court directed the concerned tax authorities to consider the petitioner's application seeking the GST revocation if he furnishes all his pending GST returns and pays all arrears, including tax, penalty, interest, and late fees.
The petitioner named Md Nekib Hussain challenged an order dated March 09, 2023, by which his GST registration was cancelled by the Superintendent, CGST, Dhaligaon Range, Goalpara-2, on the grounds of non-filing of GST returns for a continuous period of 6 (six) months.
The petitioner is registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, and the Assam Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017. On January 15, 2023, he was served with a Show Cause Notice (SCN), granting him 30 days of time to respond and appear for the personal hearing on February 13, 2023. However, before he could respond to the notice, his GST registration was suspended, effective from January 15, 2023, and thereafter was cancelled on March 09, 2023, without even specifying any proper reason behind the cancellation.
During the personal hearing before the Gauhati High Court, the petitioner counsel claimed that he could not furnish GST returns for 6 continuous months due to the fault/negligence of his tax consultant, as he never informed the petitioner about the non-compliance of the CGST/AGST Act. However, he still tried to seek GST registration revocation by filing the application; however, he could not do so as the prescribed time limit had already ended. Further claimed that he also tried furnishing all pending GST returns; however, he failed to do so due to the portal's restrictions.
The petitioner prays the court to direct the tax authorities to restore his GST registration; in return, he is ready to adhere to all the formalities of sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rule, 2017. To announce the final decision in the present case, the court referenced a judgement order dated October 17, 2025, passed by a coordinate bench of this court in the case of Dhirghat Hardware Stores. In view of the judgement delivered in this case, the court held that the petitioner is entitled to the same relief granted in the case of Dhirghat Hardware Stores.
Accordingly, the petitioner has been allowed to appeal before the concerned authority within 60 days from today, seeking restoration of his GST registration. If the petitioner complies with the provisions of Rule 22 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, files all his pending GST returns and pays all arrears, including tax, penalty, interest and late fees, then the concerned authorities must consider the petitioner's application seeking the GST restoration.
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2701My Recent Articles
- ITAT Rejects Section 69A Unexplained Money Addition Based on Alleged Over-Invoicing Entry Found in Third-Party SearchPremium
- ITAT Condoned 336-Day Delay in Section 68 Case After Taxpayer Cites Lack Of Online Communication AwarenessPremium
- United Breweries Secures Full Relief from Bombay High Court in Rs 21.92 Crore Service Tax Dispute
- Aries Agro Faces Rs 3.96 Crore GST Demand Over ITC Availment from Retrospectively Cancelled Vendors
- ITAT Restores Appeal Over Rs 9.33 Crore Section 68 Share Application Addition After DTVSV Payment FailurePremium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts
All Posts
Recent Posts
All Posts








