GST registration cancellation for non-filing of returns may be set aside subject to filing returns and payment of dues.

The petitioner’s registration under the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was cancelled by order dated 17 June 2025 on the ground that he had failed to file returns continuously for six months

A show-cause notice dated 12 February 2025 had been issued, but the petitioner did not submit a reply

The petitioner contended that he remained willing to comply with the statutory requirements by filing the returns and paying the applicable tax, interest, fine and penalty

The respondent authorities maintained that the cancellation was lawful because the petitioner had failed to file returns despite being afforded an opportunity to show cause

During the pendency of the writ petition, an appellate order dated 17 April 2026 was also passed

Whether the petitioner’s GST registration, cancelled for continuous non-filing of returns, ought to be restored when the petitioner expressed willingness to file all pending returns and discharge the applicable tax, interest, fine and penalty.

Whether restoration could be granted subject to the petitioner’s compliance with specified conditions within a prescribed period.

The Court applied the provisions and compliance framework under the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 governing cancellation of registration for non-filing of returns and the consequential requirement to discharge tax, interest, fine and penalty

It relied on the Division Bench decision in Subhakar Golder v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Serampore Charge, MAT 639 of 2024, decided on 9 April 2024, where cancellation of registration in comparable circumstances was set aside subject to filing returns for the entire default period and payment of the requisite tax, interest, fine and penalty

The Court further applied the pragmatic principle that cancellation or suspension of registration may be counterproductive to revenue collection because it prevents the taxpayer from issuing invoices and carrying on business, thereby potentially impairing future tax recovery

The Court accepted that the cancellation was triggered by the petitioner’s admitted failure to file returns and that no reply had been filed to the show-cause notice

Nevertheless, the respondents did not allege that the petitioner had adopted any dubious process to evade tax

Since the petitioner expressed willingness to regularise the entire default and the respondents could not determine the petitioner’s final liability without the filing of returns, the Court considered restoration, subject to strict compliance, more conducive to the interests of revenue than continued cancellation

Following the approach in Subhakar Golder, the Court therefore set aside the cancellation conditionally and directed the petitioner to file all returns for the default period and pay the applicable tax, interest, fine and penalty

The respondents were directed to activate the petitioner’s portal and login credentials within one week to facilitate compliance

If the petitioner complied within four weeks from receipt of the server copy of the order, the jurisdictional officer was directed to restore the registration; failure to comply would result in automatic dismissal of the writ petition and disentitlement from the benefit of the order

The appellate order dated 17 April 2026 was also set aside, and the writ petition was disposed of without costs