M/s. Shiva Sai Enterprises v. 1. The Superintendent

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the in-action of the Respondent No. 1 not deciding the application dated 23.06.2025 and consequently declare the notice vide ref. no.2A361 118012815N dated 12. 11.2018 in Form GST REG-17 and Order vide ref. no.2A361218O2O796D in Form GST REG-19 dated'18.12.2018 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without authority of law and without jurisdiction, violative of the Principles of Natural Justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 265 of the Constitution of lndia, and to consequently set aside the notice and lmpugned Order by restoring the GST registration of the' Petitioner. lA NO: 1 OF 202{ Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to suspend the operation of Order vide ref no. 2A361218020796D in Form GST REG-19 dated 1t\.12.2018 in the interest of Justice and eqr-rity as othenruise, the Petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V.VEERESHAM counser ror the Respondents No.1*, ,.!ll,o":Ilflr=:J.flt3,T,,. Counsel for the Respondents No.3 : DY.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INIDA The Court made the following: ORDER A THE HON'BLE THE CHIEFJUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIT'DDIN WRIT PETITION No.21947 of 20.25 ORDER: Mr. M.Uma Shankar, learned counsel representing Mr. V.Veeresham, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of [ndirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), appearing for respondent Nos. I and,2.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled by an order dated 18.12.2018 by respondent No.1. Petitioner sought revocation by filing an application on 23.06.2025.

4. Rule 23 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, f 2OL7 prescribes as under: \ "23. Revocation of cancellation of registration.- (1) A registered person, whose registration is cancelled by the proper officer on his own motion, may, subject to the provisions of Rule 108, subrnit an application for revocation of cancellation of 2 registration, in FORM GST REG-21, to such proper officer, within a period ol'ninety days from the ciate of the service of the order of cancellation of registration at the common portal, ei:her directly or through a Facilitation centre notified by the comrnissioner: PRO\/IDED that such period may, on sufficier-- t cause being shown eurd for reasons to be recordecl i. r,,.riting, be extended by the comrnissioner or an officer authorized by him in this behalf, not below the rank of Additional commissiorrer or Joint commissroner, as the case may be, for a furth.r period not exceeding one hundred and eighty days: PROVIDED FURTHER that no application for revocation shall be filed, il'the registration has been cancelled for the railure of the registered person to furnish returns, unless such returns are furnished and any amount due as tax, in terms of such returns, has been paid along with any amount payable toward.s interest, penalty an.d late fee in respect of the said returns: PROVIDBD ALSO that all returns due for the period from the date of thr: order of cancellation of registration till the date of the order of revocation of cancellation of registration shall be furnished by the said person within a period of thirty days frorn the date of order of revocation of cancellation of registration: PROVIDED ALSO that where the registratio, has been cancelled with retrospective effect, the registered oerson shall furnish all returns relating to period from the effective date of cancellatior-r of registration till the date of order of revocation of cancellation of registration within a period of thirty days from the date of order of revocation of cancellation of registratio,. (21 (a) where the proper officer is satisfied, for r€rasons to be recorded in writing, that there are suff-rcient grounds for revocation of cancellation of registration, he shall revoke the cancellation of registration by an order in FoRM GST REci-22 within a period of thirty days from the date of the t J .A J receipt of the application and communicate the same to tl.e applicant. (b) The proper officer may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, under circumstances other than those specified in clause (a), by an order in FORM GST REG-05, reject the application for revocation of cancellation of registration and communicate the same to the applicant. (3) The proper officer shall, before passing the order referred to in clause (b) of sub-rule (2), issue a notice in FORM GST REG-23 requiring the applicant to show cause as to why the application submitted for revocation under sub-rule (i) should not be rejected and the applicant shall furnish the reply qrithin a period of seven working days from the date of the service of the notice in FORM GSTREG-24. (4) Upon receipt of the information or clarification in FORM GST REG-24, the proper officer shall proceed to dispose of the application in the manner specified in sub-rule (2) within a period of thirty days from the date of the receipt of such information or clarification from the applicant."

5. On the previous date, learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner is interested in carrying out its business in the same name. Upon that, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC was asked to seek instructions as to whether the revocation of canCellation of its registration can be done now even after seven years or that the petitioner can be allorved to continue its business on the same n€une. On instructions, he submits today that , I i t: I i i, i ! 1 i 4 though the petitioner can undertake business on the same narne, but it will have to take a fresh registration number after clearing all the previous clues.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is interested in pursuing with the s;ame business in the sarne GSTIN number. He has referred to a decision of the Division Bench of this court in the case of Apitco.Ltd. v. The union of Indial and submitted that this court had allowed the petitioner to appear before the respondent authorities and after furnishing all the entire GS;T returns till that date with requisite fee and penalty, directed the respondents to restore the GST registration n ithout any further scrutiny so far as the default of non-payment of GST returns till t.hat date was concerned. The same \^,as as a one time measure. ::ta+' t,-- \

7. From perusal of the said judgment, it appears that the petitioner could not file returns from time to time leading to issuance of a show cause notice on 14.01.20|23. In the instant case, before the covlD pandemic intervened, the f ( l 2024 (3) TMr 1161 5 GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled on lB.I2.2OlB. The facts of the cited judgment are, therefore, distinguishable.

8. Therefore, we deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek a fresh registration in the same narne after clearing its dues and other statutory compliances. If such an application is made within a period of 10 days, the respondent authorities would consider it, in accordance r,r,ith la'*,.

9. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, there shall be no oi'der as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To, \

1. The Superintendent, Adilabad GST Range, 3rd Floor, KNR Estate, Godown Road, Nizamabad-503003

2. The Assistant Commissioner, Nizamabad Division, Medchal GST Commissionerate,, D. No. 7-9- 8321 1, KNAR Estate, Godown Road, Nizamabad- 50300

3. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi- 1 10001

4. One CC to SRI V. VEERESHATU, Advocate. IOPUCI 5. One CC to SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, (senior standing counsel for CBIC). toPUCl

6. One CC to Deputy Solicitor General of lndia), High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OPUC] HIGH COURT DATED:2810812025 \ I I ORDER WP.No.21947 of 2025 {tln lil4 14- {. O 05 t I ffi L -2 t,) * n-- . -.^.r DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS T r\?,r