Case Title: M/s. Trichy Jewellery Manufacturer Consortium Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Rockfort Assessment Circle
Court: Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court
Petition No.: W.P.(MD) No. 1865 of 2025
Date of Judgment: 23 January 2025
Category of Dispute: Revocation of GST Registration
Relevant Sections: Sections 29 and 30 of the CGST Act, 2017; Rule 23 of the CGST Rules, 2017
Facts (Para 1–3)
The petitioner, M/s. Trichy Jewellery Manufacturer Consortium Pvt. Ltd., challenged the order dated 4 December 2020 cancelling its GST registration (GSTIN 33AADCT7597D1Z5) for non-filing of returns. The petitioner contended that returns had been filed and taxes paid up to March 2020 but due to technical and financial difficulties during the pandemic period, it could not file returns from April 2020 onwards. The petitioner expressed readiness to file pending returns and pay taxes once the portal access was restored.
Questions for Consideration
Whether the petitioner, whose GST registration was cancelled for non-filing of returns, could seek restoration on the grounds of willingness to file pending returns and pay taxes, and whether such procedural default could be condoned following the precedent in Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) and others, 2022 (2) TMI 933 (Madras High Court).
Court’s Observations (Para 3–5)
The Court observed that the present issue was squarely covered by the precedent in Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece Centre (2022), wherein cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns was treated as a rectifiable procedural lapse, provided the taxpayer complied with certain post-revocation conditions. The Court reproduced the detailed operative directions from Suguna Cutpiece, requiring taxpayers to:
-
File all pending returns for the period before cancellation within 45 days.
-
Pay due tax, interest, and late fees in cash (not via unutilized ITC).
-
Allow scrutiny of any claimed ITC by the department before utilization.
-
File returns for the post-cancellation period and discharge liabilities in cash.
-
Enable GSTN to reopen the portal for compliance.
Judgment (Para 6)
Following the consistent view taken in Suguna Cutpiece and similar cases, the Court extended identical relief to the petitioner. It directed that upon compliance with the above conditions, the petitioner’s cancelled GST registration shall stand revived forthwith, enabling filing of pending returns and continuation of business. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.
Table: Cases Referred and Verdicts
| Case Name | Citation / Court | Issue | Verdict / Principle |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) & Ors. | 2022 (2) TMI 933 – Madras High Court | Revocation of GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns | Cancellation treated as rectifiable; registration to be restored upon payment of dues and filing of returns. |
Between Fine Lines
This decision reinforces that GST registration cancellations for procedural lapses like non-filing of returns are not irreversible. Businesses can seek restoration by clearing dues, filing pending returns, and complying with departmental scrutiny. The ruling aligns with the trade-friendly judicial stance prioritizing compliance over penal cancellation, safeguarding business continuity while ensuring revenue protection.
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.”
