M/S Ganapati Enterprise and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/6

¶2

GAHC010043852026

¶3

undefined

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Linked Case : WP(C)/1269/2026

¶6

M/S GANAPATI ENTERPRISE AND ANR A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM SITUATED AT 44 A.T. ROAD MARWARIPATTY NAGAON ASSAM-782001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI BHARGAB SAIKIA.

¶7

2: SRI BHARGAB SAIKIA PROPRIETOR OF THE PETITIONER NO. 1 FIRM RESIDENT OF VILL- BHOTAIGAON P.O. UDIYAGAON NAGAON ASSAM. VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE TAXATION ASSAM.

¶9

2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

¶10

ASSAM KAR BHAWAN G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM

¶11

3:THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX

¶12

APPEALS NAGAON ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/6

¶14

4:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX

¶15

NAGAON-3 ASSAM

¶16

-----------Advocate for : MS. M L GOPE Advocate for : SC FINANCE AND TAXATION appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶18

ORDER

¶19

16.03.2026

¶20

Heard Ms. N. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri H. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, Finance (Taxation) Department for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4.

¶21

2. As per the facts projected, the petitioner no. 1 is a proprietorship business under the name & style, “M/S Ganapati Enterprise” with the petitioner no. 2. It is an Assesee registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017/Assam Goods and Services Tax (AGST) Act, 2017 bearing registration No. 18BGLPS4935A1Z8. On the reason of non-filing of GST returns for a continuous period of six months, the petitioners were served with a show cause notice bearing reference No.ZA181222009568K, dated 12.12.2022 asking to furnish reply to the aforesaid notice within a period of 7 (seven) days from the date of service of notice and it was mentioned in the aforesaid show cause notice that if the petitioners fail to furnish a reply within the stipulated date or fail to appear for personal hearing on the appointed date and time, the case will be decided ex parte on the basis of the available records and on merits. Thereafter, the

¶22

Page No.# 3/6

¶23

impugned order dated 27.12.2022 was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Nagaon-3, Assam whereby the petitioner’s GST registration has been cancelled for not furnishing returns for a continuous period of 6 (six) or more months.

¶24

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to non-conversant of online procedure and also because of the fact that the petitioner no. 2 was having various health issues, he could not visit the GST portal and accordingly could not submit any reply to the said show cause notice in time. It is further contended that when the petitioners came across the said notice, the time for filing reply and attending the hearing was already over and order had also been uploaded in the portal.

¶25

4. Thereafter, the petitioners filed appeal seeking revocation of GST cancellation, however, the same was rejected vide dated 17.02.2026 by the Appellate Authority as the time limit prescribed for filing of appeal was elapsed.

¶26

5. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶27

6. Ms. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to comply with all the formalities required as per proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017.

¶28

7. As per Section 29(2)(c), an officer, duly empowered, may cancel the GST registration of a person from such date, including any retrospective date, as he

¶29

Page No.# 4/6

¶30

deems fit, where any registered person, has not furnished returns for a continuous period of 6 (six) months. Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 has laid down the procedure for cancellation of the registration. The said Rule is extracted herein below:

¶31

“Rule 22 : Cancellation of Registration (1) Where the proper officer has reasons to believe that the registration of a person is liable to be cancelled under Section 29, he shall issue a notice to such person in FORM GST REG-17, requiring him to show cause, within a period of seven working days from the date of the service of such notice, as to why his registration shall not be cancelled.

¶32

(2) The reply to the show cause notice issued under sub-rule [1] shall be furnished in FORM REG-18 within the period specified in the said sub-rule.

¶33

(3) Where a person who has submitted an application for cancellation of his registration is no longer liable to be registered or his registration is liable to be cancelled, the proper officer shall issue an order in FORM GST REG-19, within a period of thirty days from the date of application submitted under Rule 20 or, as the case may be, the date of the reply to the show cause issued under sub-rule (1), (or under sub-rule (2A) of Rule 21A) cancel the registration, with effect from a date to be determined by him and notify the taxable person, directing him to pay arrears of any tax, interest or penalty including the amount liable to be paid under subsection (5) of Section 29.

¶34

(4) Where the reply furnished under sub-rule (2) (or in response to the notice issued under sub-rule (2A) of Rule 21A) is found to be satisfactory, the proper officer shall drop the proceedings and pass an order in FORM GST REG-20 : Provided that where the person instead of replying to the notice served under sub rule (1) for contravention of the provisions contained in Clause (b) or Clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 29, furnishes all the pending returns and makes full payment of the tax dues along with applicable interest and late fee, the proper officer shall drop the proceedings and pass an order in FORM GST REG-20.

¶35

(5) The provisions of sub-rule (3) shall, mutatis mutandis, apply to the legal

¶36

Page No.# 5/6

¶37

heirs of a deceased proprietor, as if the application had been submitted by the proprietor himself.”

¶38

8. It is discernible from a reading of the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules 2017 that if a person, who has been served with a show cause notice under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, is ready and willing to furnish all the pending returns and to make full payment of the tax itself along with applicable interest and late fee, the officer, duly empowered, can drop the proceedings and pass an order in the prescribed Form i.e. Form GST REG-20.

¶39

9. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also referred to an order dated 18.07.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 3926/2025 ( Dipjyoti Borah Vs. The State of Assam & 2 Ors .) wherein the petitioners therein were similarly situated like the present petitioners. Shri Baruah, learned Standing Counsel has, however, raised an objection on the ground of delay and has submitted that though the petitioners are relying upon the aforesaid order dated 18.07.2025, the present order may not be treated to be a precedent.

¶40

10 . Having regard to the fact that the GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 for the reason that the petitioners did not submit returns for a period of 6 (six) months or more and the provisions contained in the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017 and cancellation of registration entails serious civil consequences, this Court is of the considered view that in the event the petitioners approach the officer, duly empowered, by furnishing all the pending returns and make full payment of the tax dues, along with applicable interest and late fee, the officer duly empowered, has the authority and jurisdiction to drop the proceedings and

¶41

Page No.# 6/6

¶42

pass an order in the prescribed Form.

¶43

11 . In such view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by providing that the petitioners shall approach the concerned authority within a period of 2 (two) months from today seeking restoration of her GST registration. If the petitioners submit such an application and complies with all the requirements as provided in the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the concerned authority shall consider the application of the petitioners for restoration of the GST registration and passed necessary orders in accordance with law. The aforesaid process be completed expeditiously and preferably within an outer limit of 60 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶44

12 . It is needless to say that the period as stipulated under Section 73 (10) of the Central GST Act/State GST Act shall be computed from the date of the instant order, except for the financial year 2025-26, which shall be as per Section 44 of the Central GST Act/State GST Act. The petitioner herein also be liable to make payment of arrears i.e. tax, penalty, interest and late fees.

¶45

13 . The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶46

14 . It is made clear that the present order may not be treated to be a precedent.

¶47

JUDGE

¶48

Comparing Assistant

M/S Ganapati Enterprise and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ganapati Enterprise and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hrd Commercial Industrial Security Force Private Limited Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Brahmaputra Tele Productions Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Hajrat Ali and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Pranabjyoti Barman Vs Union of India and 2 Ors.

Hobibor Rahman Mondal and 8 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

M/S Nit Traders and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.