Gauhati High Court Allows Restoration of GST Registration Despite Lapse of 270 Days, if Dues Cleared 

Gauhati High Court Allows Restoration of GST Registration Despite Lapse of 270 Days, if Dues Cleared 

Dhirghat Hardware Stores, a proprietorship registered under the CGST/AGST Acts, faced cancellation of its GST registration after failing to file returns for over six months. A show cause notice dated 15.01.2023 was issued, warning of ex-parte action but not specifying any date of hearing. The proprietor, unfamiliar with online procedures, could not file a reply before the deadline and later found that an order cancelling registration had already been passed on 22.03.2023. The appeal filed against the cancellation order was dismissed on 09.10.2025.

During this period, the petitioner updated all pending returns up to March 2023, along with full payment of GST dues, interest, and late fees. However, when attempting to file an application for revocation of cancellation, the portal displayed that the statutory timeline of 270 days had expired, leaving the petitioners without any administrative remedy. They approached the High Court seeking restoration of registration, submitting that they were now fully compliant and willing to meet all conditions under Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.

Central Issue: Whether the GST registration of the petitioner, cancelled for non-filing of returns under Section 29(2)(c), can be restored when the taxpayer has subsequently filed all pending returns and discharged all dues, despite expiry of the time limit for filing a revocation application.

High Court’s Ruling: The Gauhati High Court held that cancellation of GST registration carries serious civil consequences and that Rule 22(4) expressly permits dropping cancellation proceedings if the taxpayer furnishes all pending returns and makes full payment of tax, interest, and late fees. The Court noted that the petitioner’s cancellation was based solely on prolonged non-filing and that the proviso to Rule 22(4) squarely applied.

Relying on decision in Sanjoy Nath v. Union of India, the Court permitted the petitioners to approach the competent authority within two months seeking restoration. If the petitioners file all pending returns and pay all statutory dues as required, the authority must consider and process restoration of GST registration in accordance with the law. The Court further directed that the limitation period under Section 73(10) for assessing past dues will be computed afresh from the date of its order, except for FY 2024-25, which remains governed by Section 44. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of without costs.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below