GST registration cancellation quashed, with restoration conditioned on filing returns and paying statutory arrears.

The petitioner, Nizora Projects Pvt. Ltd., was registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, bearing GST Registration No. 18AAICNI229P1Z0, and was engaged in construction, contract and supply activities.

Its GST registration was cancelled by order dated 12 August 2025, bearing Reference No. ZA1808250106498, purportedly following a show-cause notice dated 7 July 2025.

The petitioner contended that it had not received the show-cause notice and that the cancellation was therefore effected without notice or compliance with natural justice.

The petitioner subsequently sought revocation of the cancellation, but the application could not be filed through the GST Portal because the prescribed limitation period had expired.

It accordingly invoked the writ jurisdiction of the Gauhati High Court, challenging the cancellation and the denial of revocation on limitation grounds.

The Court applied Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the corresponding provisions of the AGST Act concerning cancellation of registration, including cancellation for failure to furnish returns under Section 29(2)(c).

It also considered Rules 21 and 23 of the applicable GST Rules, which regulate cancellation and revocation of cancellation, and invoked the principles of natural justice requiring meaningful notice and an opportunity of hearing before adverse administrative action is taken.

The Court relied on Motaleb Bhuyan v. State of Assam & Ors., reported as 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1429, particularly the directions contained in paragraph 50, as authority for granting similar remedial directions in cases involving cancellation of GST registration and delay in seeking revocation.

The Court further directed compliance with the statutory frameworks under Sections 73(10), 74(10) and 44 of the CGST/AGST Acts regarding the relevant periods for assessment and annual returns.

The Court noted that the cancellation order referred to a show-cause notice which, according to the petitioner, had never been received.

Since the petitioner was thereby denied an effective opportunity to respond, the cancellation was found to be unsustainable on account of breach of natural justice and non-compliance with the statutory procedure governing cancellation.

Although the petitioner had also failed to file the revocation application within the prescribed period, the Court treated the issue as covered by the principle and directions laid down in Motaleb Bhuyan.

It therefore considered it appropriate to quash the cancellation while protecting the revenue by requiring the petitioner to file all pending returns and pay the resultant tax, interest, penalty and late fees within the stipulated period.

The petitioner was directed to file all returns from the date of default up to the date of the judgment within 30 days.

The periods prescribed under Sections 73(10) and 74(10) of the CGST/AGST Acts were to be computed from the date of judgment, except for the financial year 2025–26, which was to be governed by Section 44.

The petitioner was also held liable to pay all arrears, including tax, penalty, interest and late fees.