M/S Ejangpo Integrated Farm and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010020392026

¶3

2026:GAU-AS:2151

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/743/2026

¶6

M/S EJANGPO INTEGRATED FARM AND ANR

¶7

BEARING GSTIN- 18CDPPR0948Q4ZD, A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI SINGDON RONGHANG, HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT DISAMA, MANJHA, DIPHU, DISTKARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM, PIN-782460

¶8

2: SINGDON RONGHANG S/O TULIRAM RONGHANG PROPRIETOR OF M/S EJANGO INTEGRATED FARM R/O DISAMA MANJHA DIPHU DIST- KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN-78246

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

¶12

2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM KAR BHAWAN GANESHGURI DISPUR GUWHAAATI ASSAM-781006

¶13

3:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG DISTRICT

¶14

Page No.# 2/5

¶15

PIN-782460 ASSA

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶17

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. C. Agarwal, Advocate

¶18

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Gogoi, Addl. A.G.

¶19

Date on which judgment was reserved : NA

¶20

Date of pronouncement of judgment : 13.02.2026

¶21

Whether the pronouncement is of the

¶22

Operative part of the judgment? : NA Whether the full judgment has been pronounced? : Yes

¶23

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶24

Heard Mr. C. Agarwal, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam appears on behalf of the respondents.

¶25

The petitioners herein have filed the instant writ petition challenging the order dated 16.09.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Diphu-1 whereby the petitioners’ registration was cancelled. The brief facts which led to the filing of the instant writ petition are narrated herein under.

¶26

Page No.# 3/5

¶27

The petitioner No. 2 claims to be the proprietor of the petitioner No. 1 firm. For the purpose of carrying on the business, the petitioner No. 1 was registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and was issued a registration number bearing 18CDPPR0948Q4ZD.

¶28

It is the case of the petitioners that due to the non-filing of returns by the petitioners for a period of more than 6 (six) months, the petitioners were issued a show cause notice by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, for cancellation of the registration in Form GST REG-17/31 dated 13.08.2024 to the petitioners in the portal. It was further mentioned in the said show cause notice that the registration of the petitioners stood suspended w.e.f. 13.08.2024. The petitioners, at the relevant point of time, due to certain personal difficulties, were unable to provide the necessary information to their Chartered Accountant for filing the returns. Consequently, the Chartered Accountant was unable to file the returns in the absence of instructions from the petitioners. The petitioners also failed to take note of the show cause notice issued and, accordingly, did not file any reply thereto. On 16.09.2024, the respondent No.3 cancelled the registration on the ground of failure to furnish return for the prescribed period. The cancellation of the registration was given effect from 16.09.2024.

¶29

Page No.# 4/5

¶30

It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners had submitted the return for the period July-September for the financial year 20242025. The filing of the return in Form GSTR-3B has been enclosed as Annexures-7 (colly) to the writ petition. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners approached the authority for revocation of the order for cancellation under Section 30 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, but as the period was over, the Respondent Authorities did not respond to the request of the petitioners. It is under such circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶31

This Court finds it pertinent to take note of that the issue similar to the present one was dealt with by this Court in detail in the judgment rendered in the case of Motaleb Bhuyan Vs. The State of Assam & Ors , reported in (2025) SCC OnLine Gau 1429 .

¶32

It is the opinion of this Court that as the facts of the instant case are similar to those petitioners in the judgment rendered in the case of Motaleb Bhuyan, (supra) , the petitioners herein is entitled to similar reliefs. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:-

¶33

(i) The order of cancellation of registration dated 16.09.2024 is set aside and quashed.

¶34

Page No.# 5/5

¶35

(ii) The petitioners herein are directed to file the returns for the period from 13.08.2024 till date, within 30 days from the date of the instant order. It is observed that if the returns have been filed, there shall no necessity for filing again.

¶36

(iii) The period as stipulated in Section 73(10) of the CGST Act of 2017 shall be computed from the date of the instant judgment, except for the financial year 2025-26, which shall be as per Section 44 of the CGST Act of 2017.

¶37

(iv) The petitioners herein shall also be liable to make payment of the arrears, i.e. tax, penalty, interest and late fees.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Digitally signed by Satyam Sharma Date: 2026.02.18 07:14:27 +05'30' Comparing Assistant

M/S Ejangpo Integrated Farm and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ejangpo Integrated Farm and Anr. v. the State of Assam 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

Abdul Kadir and 132 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 9 Ors.

Moinul Hoque and 35 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mahammad Ali and 61 Ors. Vs Union of India and 9 Ors.

Sanjay Chauhan and 242 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Monowara Khatun and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Othrs

Syed Ameenul Alam Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.