Gauhati HC Quashes Non-Speaking GST Registration Cancellation Order

Case Details

• Case Name: Juri Bhuyan v. Union of India & Ors.

• Court: Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram & Arunachal Pradesh)

• Petition Number: WP(C)/1701/2025

• Category of Dispute: GST Registration Cancellation

• Date of Judgment: 01.05.2025

• Relevant Sections:

  • Section 29(2)(c), Section 39(1), Section 107 – CGST Act, 2017

  • Rule 21(h), Rule 22 of CGST Rules, 2017

Facts of the Case (Paras 2–7, 15–17)

1. The petitioner, a works contractor from Assam, was registered under GST from 01.07.2017 with GSTIN 18BOXPB4909M1Z9 (Para 2).

2. A Show Cause Notice dated 27.08.2020 was issued for non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months, but it lacked specifics of the defaulting period (Para 15).

3. The petitioner claimed she could not file a reply due to COVID-19 disruptions and was later barred by time limits from applying for revocation or filing an appeal (Paras 6, 6.1).

4. The Proper Officer cancelled the registration w.e.f. 09.09.2020 via an order that neither provided reasons nor specified details as required in Form GST REG-19 (Paras 16, 21).

5. The officer’s order incorrectly mentioned receipt of a reply and hearing from the petitioner, which the petitioner denied, supported by an affidavit (Para 17).

Question(s) in Consideration (Paras 9–13, 21–23)

• Whether cancellation of GST registration without recording reasons amounts to a valid order under Section 29(2)(c) CGST Act and Rule 22 of CGST Rules?

• Whether a delayed writ petition (after four years) can be entertained against a vulnerable non-speaking order?

Observations of the Court (Paras 18–24)

1. Cancellation of registration must follow Rule 22 procedure and be in Form GST REG-19, mandating reasons (Paras 13, 18).

2. The impugned order was non-speaking and lacked application of mind, thereby violating principles of natural justice (Paras 21–23).

3. Even if no reply was filed, the officer was duty-bound to issue a reasoned order (Para 22).

4. Recording of reasons is essential to prevent arbitrary action and is implicit in natural justice (Para 23).

5. Delay in filing writ petition was outweighed by the illegality of the cancellation order (Para 25).

Judgment of the Court (Paras 24–29)

1. The cancellation order dated 09.09.2020 was set aside and quashed as illegal and arbitrary (Para 24).

2. Matter remanded to the stage of SCN (Form GST REG-17), allowing petitioner to reply or file pending returns with taxes, interest, and late fees (Para 26–28).

3. Proper Officer directed to complete the process within one month based on petitioner’s option, by issuing either REG-19 (cancellation) or REG-20 (revocation) (Para 28).

4. Writ petition allowed; no order as to costs (Para 29).

Between Fine Lines

• GST registration cancellation must be through a reasoned order, not a formality.

• Non-speaking orders without reasons are invalid, even if the taxpayer defaults.

• Delay in filing writ is condonable if the impugned order is fundamentally flawed.

• Proper Officer must adhere strictly to Rule 22 procedure and Form REG-19.

• Petitioner gets fresh opportunity to comply or contest cancellation.

Summary of Referred Cases

Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”