GST Registration Cancellation Upheld Due to Time-Barred Appeal; High Court Declines to Condone Delay:

GST Registration Cancellation Upheld Due to Time-Barred Appeal; High Court Declines to Condone Delay

High Court reiterates that statutory timelines under CGST Act are mandatory and cannot be diluted through writ jurisdiction

GST Appeal Filed Beyond 120 Days Cannot Be Entertained Under Article 226: Gujarat HC

authorMeetu KumaridateFeb 10, 2026
Last update on Feb 10, 2026
GST Registration Cancellation Upheld Due to Time-Barred Appeal; High Court Declines to Condone Delay The petitioner, M/s. Ravi Plumbing and Construction, failed to file GST returns under Section 39 of the CGST Act after the first quarter of FY 2024-25. As a result, a show cause notice in Form GST REG-17 was issued, followed by an ex parte order cancelling the GST registration under Section 29(2)(c).
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
The petitioner claimed to be unaware of the proceedings and stated that no reply or personal hearing could be attended. An appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act was ultimately filed nearly six months later, citing technical glitches and lack of access to login credentials. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal solely on the ground of limitation. Main Issue: Whether the High Court can exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to condone delay in filing a GST appeal beyond the maximum statutory period of 120 days prescribed under Section 107 of the CGST Act. HC Decided: The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that once the total statutory period of 120 days for filing an appeal stands exhausted, neither the Appellate Authority nor the High Court has the power to condone the delay.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
The Court emphasised that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to override clear legislative intent on limitation. The reasons offered by the petitioner were found to be unsatisfactory, and the Court reiterated that taxpayers are expected to remain vigilant and comply strictly with timelines under taxing statutes. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2158
Up Next

Loading suggestions…