Disposed¶33

MD Abjal Ali v. the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Jan 2026WP(C)/69/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court writ: restoration of GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns for six months; revocation application time-barred (270-day timeline from cancellation order expired); cancellation order dated 17.04.2024 (ZA180424015371W) interfered with and set aside; revival conditional on deposit of outstanding statutory dues intimated by Superintendent, CGST Guwahati-D-11 Mangaldai Range; disposal in terms of co-ordinate Bench orders (W.P(C) Nos. 6930, 1049, 5181, 6366 of 2023); works contract assessee; GST Act, 2017; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Impugned cancellation order dated 17.04.2024 set aside; respondent No. 3 to intimate outstanding statutory dues up to the date of cancellation, and upon the petitioner depositing the same, the authority to revoke the cancellation and restore the GST registration. ¶33

MD Abjal Ali Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors. — GST and Indirect Tax | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 17.04.2024 cancelling the petitioner's GST registration — after the time for filing a revocation application had expired — should be interfered with and the registration restored subject to payment of outstanding statutory dues. +1 more

¶32

Court's answer

The impugned order dated 17.04.2024 cancelling the petitioner's GST registration is interfered with and set aside.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

Respondent No. 3, the Superintendent of Central Goods & Services Tax, Guwahati, is directed to intimate to the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues, if any, standing in his name till the date of cancellation of his GST registration.

¶32

Key takeaways

If outstanding statutory dues under GST are intimated, the petitioner shall deposit them; upon such payment the respondent authority is to pass appropriate orders revoking the cancellation and restoring the GST registration.ratio¶32
Reconsideration of the revocation prayer was necessary because exclusion of the petitioner from the GST regime would result in statutory dues not being deposited, which would not be in the interest of revenue.ratio¶28
Since similar orders had been passed by this Court and other Co-ordinate Benches in like matters, the present petition was disposed of in terms of the orders in W.P(C) No. 6930/2023, W.P(C) No. 1049/2023, WP(C) No.5181/2023 and WP(C) No.6366/2023 rather than kept pending.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Soumitra Saikia, J.), WP(C)/69/2026, decided 07.01.2026 — GST registration cancellation set aside; restoration directed upon payment of dues. Md Abjal Ali, a works-contract assessee registered under the GST Act, 2017 (Registration No. 18BJUPA8016J1ZV), did not file returns for a continuous period of six months owing to personal problems; respondent No. 3 issued a show cause notice on 13.11.2023 and the registration was cancelled by order dated 17.04.2024 (Ref. No. ZA180424015371W), effective the same date. The petitioner could not file a revocation application as the prescribed timeline of 270 days from the cancellation order had expired. Holding that exclusion of the assessee from the GST regime would result in statutory dues not being deposited and would not be in the interest of revenue, and disposing of the petition in terms of the Court's earlier orders in W.P(C) No. 6930/2023, W.P(C) No. 1049/2023, WP(C) No.5181/2023 and WP(C) No.6366/2023 (which the respondent's Standing Counsel did not dispute), the Court set aside the cancellation and directed respondent No. 3 (Superintendent, Central Goods & Services Tax, Guwahati) to intimate the total outstanding statutory dues standing in the petitioner's name till the date of cancellation; upon deposit of such dues, the authority is to pass appropriate orders revoking the cancellation and restoring the registration. Writ petition disposed of; no order as to costs.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010000532026

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/69/2026

¶6

MD ABJAL ALI

¶7

SON OF MAJJIBAR ALI,RESIDENT OF BAIHATA CHARIALI,GUWAHATI ROAD,P.O. P.S. BAIHATA CHARIALI,DISTRICT KAMRUP, ASSAM -781381.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THEGOVERNMENT OF INDIA,MINISTRY OF FINANCE,DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,ROOM NO. 66A, NORTH BLOCK,NEW DELHI 110001.

¶10

2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

¶11

CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS 5TH FLOOR GST BHAWAN KEDAR ROAD MACHKHOWA GUWAHATI-781001

¶12

3:THE SUPERINTENDENT

¶13

CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX GUWAHATI-D-11 MANGALDAI RANGE ASSAM

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R S MISHRA, MS. M DEY,MS B SARMA

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, GST

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶18

ORDER

¶19

07.01.2026

¶20

Heard Mr. R. S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST.

¶21

2. The petitioner is engaged in execution of works contract and is an assessee registered under the provision of GST Act, 2017 and has GST Registration being Registration No. 18BJUPA8016J1ZV.

¶22

3. Pursuant to being registered under the GST Act, the petitioner has been regularly submitting his GST returns. However, due to several personal problems his GST returns could not be submitted for a continuous period of 6 (six) months. On 13.11.2023, respondent No. 3 issued a show cause notice on the petitioner to show cause as to why the GST registration should not be cancelled for not filing the returns for a continuous period of 6 months. The reply was directed to be submitted within 30 days from the date of service of notice.

¶23

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by order dated 17.04.2024 under reference No. ZA180424015371W the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled. The effective date of cancellation was 17.04.2024. The petitioner thereafter, tried to file necessary application seeking revocation of GST cancellation however, the same could not be filed as the time limit prescribed for filing of revocation application had elapsed and a message was displayed in the screen “Timeline of 270 days from the date of cancellation order provided to taxpayer to file application for revocation of cancellation is

¶24

Page No.# 3/4

¶25

expired”. The petitioner having no other alternative has approached this Court instead of preferring the appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to various orders passed by the Co-ordinate Benches too, whereby this Court had passed orders for restoration of the GST registration.

¶26

5. Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST, however, does not dispute the position that orders have been passed by the Co-ordinate Benches directing the restoration of GST Registration upon complete payment of all dues, if any.

¶27

6. The learned counsels for the parties have been heard. Pleadings available on record have also been perused.

¶28

7. The petitioner is engaged in the business of trading of kitchen utensils and other ancillary items. Under the GST regime, the petitioner was required to pay the necessary dues under the CGST or SGST. These statutory dues are required to be paid by all entities who are registered under the GST regime. Such payments of statutory due(s) contribute towards the revenue collection by the Union. If the petitioner is not included within the GST regime, then any statutory dues that may be required to be deposited by the petitioner will not be deposited and which will not be in the interest of the revenue. Therefore, in order that the petitioner is required to comply with his statutory obligations of payment of taxes under the GST regime, it would be necessary for the departmental authorities to re-consider the prayer of the petitioner for revocation of his cancellation of GST registration.

¶29

8. It is submitted at the bar that there are several orders passed by this Court as well as by other Co-ordinate Benches in similar matters whereby the matters have been disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to revoke the

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

cancellation of registration upon due payment of all statutory dues payable by the petitioners. In some matters, the assessee had approached the statutory appellate authority for redressal of their grievances which however, was rejected by the appellate authority. This Court is therefore of the view that since similar such orders have been passed by this Court as well as other Co-ordinate Benches, it will serve no purpose to keep the present writ petition pending. This present writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of similar orders as had been done by the orders passed in W.P(C) No. 6930/2023, W.P(C) No. 1049/2023, WP(C) No.5181/2023 and WP(C) No.6366/2023.

¶32

9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17.04.2024 is hereby interfered with and set aside. It is directed that the Respondent No. 3, namely Superintendent of Central Goods & Services Tax, Guwahati will intimate the petitioner the total outstanding statutory dues, if any, standing in the name of the petitioner till the date of cancellation of his GST registration. Upon such intimation, if any such outstanding statutory dues under GST are required to be paid, the same shall be deposited by the petitioner without fail. Upon such payment of statutory dues under the GST by the petitioner, the respondent authority will pass appropriate orders and revoke the cancellation by restoring the GST registration of the petitioner.

¶33

10. Accordingly, the writ petition stand disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

MD Abjal Ali v. the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Abjal Ali v. the Union of India and 2 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

Dilip Kumar Gogoi Vs the Assam State Housing Board and 2 Ors.

Md. Yasin Ali Vs the Assam State Housing Board and 2 Ors.

Ashish Kumar Dey Vs the Assam State Housing Board and 2 Ors.

Abdus Matin Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Raju Das Vs the State of Assam and Othrs

Sanchita Saxena and Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.