The Calcutta High Court reaffirmed that even after the expiry of the condonable period for statutory appeal under the CGST Act, taxpayers may be granted an opportunity to restore their cancelled GST registration if they remedy statutory breaches—specifically by filing pending returns and clearing dues—provided precedent such as Subhankar Golder is satisfied. This order follows existing precedent, confirming that reliefs of this nature remain available in the interest of substantive justice for taxpayers and GST authorities.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/2105/2025 of CHANDRA SHEKHHAR PURI SANYASI ALIAS CHANDRA SHEKHHAR PURI Vs JOINT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, SILIGURI APPEAL COMMISSIONERATE, CGST AND CX AND ORS |
| CNR | WBCHCJ0050122025 |
| Date of Registration | 23-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 31-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Bench | Court No. 2, Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri (Appellate Side) |
| Precedent Value | Binding within jurisdiction; persuasive for similar matters in other courts dealing with GST registration cancellation and restoration issues |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms precedent in Subhankar Golder – Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Serampore Charge & Ors. |
| Type of Law | Taxation Law (CGST Act, 2017 – registration, appeals, limitation) |
| Questions of Law | Whether a taxpayer whose GST registration is cancelled for non-filing of returns can seek restoration by filing pending returns and clearing dues after the appeal period has expired. |
| Ratio Decidendi | The Court held that in view of the Division Bench ruling in Subhankar Golder, taxpayers may be given a further opportunity to regularise their status by complying with statutory requirements even if the appeal against cancellation was filed belatedly. The process for restoration is subject to strict compliance: the taxpayer must file all pending returns and make payment of tax, interest, penalty, and fine within the stipulated period set by the Court. Restoration of registration will then follow as a matter of course if compliance is demonstrated. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | Subhankar Golder – Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Serampore Charge & Ors. (MAT 639 of 2024, Division Bench Calcutta High Court) |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Relief is guided by the principle that substantive justice should prevail over hyper-technicalities, provided statutory compliance is ultimately achieved. The order confirms the application of appellate and writ court jurisdiction to allow such restoration in furtherance of the object and purpose of tax administration. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner, a registered GST taxpayer and government contractor, had his GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns after March 2022 by an order dated December 13, 2022 with effect from November 8, 2022. His statutory appeal was rejected as time-barred on August 28, 2025. The petitioner sought restoration by relying on recent Division Bench precedent. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and quasi-judicial GST appellate authorities facing similar restoration applications post-limitation |
| Follows | Subhankar Golder – Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Serampore Charge & Ors. (MAT 639 of 2024, Division Bench Calcutta High Court) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The order clarifies that courts may permit restoration of GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns, even when the statutory appeal is time-barred, if the taxpayer remedies all defaults within a court-stipulated time.
- The filing of all pending returns and payment of outstanding tax, interest, penalty, and fine are non-negotiable preconditions for restoration.
- The judgment upholds the position that precedent from Subhankar Golder (Division Bench) binds single-judge benches and statutory authorities.
- Lawyers should use this ruling to secure relief for similarly placed clients, especially where registration is cancelled and appeal periods have expired.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the petitioner’s appeal against cancellation was dismissed as time-barred, but Division Bench precedent in Subhankar Golder permitted an opportunity to regularise GST registration by condoning such procedural lapses in the interest of justice.
- It applied the principle that when the taxpayer is willing to make good on statutory defaults (filing returns and making payment of all admitted liabilities), such restoration furthers the effective administration and objectives of the GST system.
- The Court allowed the petition by setting aside earlier orders of cancellation, explicitly directing the petitioner to comply with all filing and payment requirements within three weeks.
- Restoration is conditional and automatic only upon full compliance; failure results in automatic dismissal of the writ.
- Logistically, the tax authorities are directed to open the GST portal to enable compliance.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- The petitioner’s registration was cancelled for non-filing of returns post-March 2022.
- His statutory appeal was rejected as time-barred.
- Relied on the Division Bench order in Subhankar Golder to claim an opportunity for restoration on complying with all statutory requirements.
Respondents (CGST Authorities):
- Submitted that the appellate authority’s order was reasoned and based on the record, emphasizing the late filing of appeal.
Factual Background
The petitioner, a government contractor and registered taxpayer under the CGST Act, failed to file GST returns after March 2022. His GST registration was cancelled with retrospective effect. Though he appealed the cancellation, his appeal was dismissed as time-barred. The petitioner invoked the Division Bench decision in Subhankar Golder, seeking a further opportunity to restore his registration by filing defaulted returns and making pending payments.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment deals with the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 regarding cancellation of registration and statutory time limits for appeal.
- The statutory scheme allows appeal against cancellation of registration, but subject to strict limitation (and limited condonability).
- The Court, following precedent, interprets the law to allow writ relief even beyond statutory limitation, conditioned strictly on substantive compliance (all returns filed, dues paid).
- No constitutional provisions were invoked.
Procedural Innovations
- The Court directed the GST authorities to open the portal for the petitioner to facilitate compliance—demonstrating judicial willingness to ensure administrative barriers do not defeat substantive justice.
- The benefit of the judgment is made self-executing: satisfaction of compliance conditions leads to automatic restoration; failure leads to automatic dismissal without further litigation.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – When existing law is affirmed.