A.Vinoth KumarRepresented by its Proprietor Mr.A.Vinoth Kumar 4/415-1 v. Commercial Tax OfficerNamakkal Rural Assessment Circle Namakkal

WP No. 18391 of 2026__________Page1 of 6IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 03.06.2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHYWP No. 18391 of 2026andW.M.P. Nos.19755 and 19756 of 2026A.Vinoth KumarRepresented by its Proprietor Mr.A.Vinoth Kumar 4/415-1,Bommaikuttaimedu, Sellappampatti Post, Namakkal-637019..PetitionerVsCommercial Tax OfficerNamakkal Rural Assessment Circle Namakkal...RespondentPetition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the respondent in Reff. No. ZA330123114320J and quash the proceedings dated 20.01.2023 passed therein and further direct the respondent to restore the Petitioner’s GST Registration No. 33AUKPV4045Q1ZW granted under the TNGST / CGST Act, 2017.For Petitioner: Mr.N ChandirasekarFor Respondent: Mr.L.Gokulraj, Govt. Counsel (Tax)ORDERThe petitioner challenges an order of cancellation of his GST registration. The petitioner is involved in the business of civil construction https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 18391 of 2026__________Page2 of 6and was a registered person under applicable GST laws. Pursuant to a show cause notice dated 05.01.2023 stating that the petitioner had not filed GST monthly returns regularly, the impugned order was issued. According to the petitioner, as he has taken the GST registration numbers for the purpose of participating in the Government tender but he was not a successful bidder, he was unable to file the monthly returns. The present writ petition was filed in the said facts and circumstances.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cancellation of the GST registration is causing immense hardship and that such cancellation should be revoked. In support of his contentions, he draws reference to the Judgment of this Court in Suguna Cutpiece v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST), W.P.Nos.25048 of 2021 batch (Suguna Cutpiece).

Mr.L.Gokul Raj, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. He submits that the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled on account of the petitioner not filing returns regularly. He further submits that the order issued in Suguna Cutpiece was a conditional order and that the petitioner should be directed to comply with all conditions stipulated therein.

In Suguna Cutpiece, this Court directed restoration of GST registration subject to several terms and conditions. The said judgment https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 18391 of 2026__________Page3 of 6was followed thereafter in many cases. In order to maintain consistency, I am inclined to follow the said judgment.

In the operative portion thereof, the following directions were issued: "i. The petitioner is directed to file her returns for the period prior to the cancellation of registration, together with tax dues along with interest thereon and the fee fixed for belated filing of returns within a period of forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.ii. It is made clear that such payment of tax, interest, fine / fee and etc. shall not be allowed to be made or adjusted from and out of any Input Tax Credit which may be lying unutilized or unclaimed in the hands of the petitioner.iii. If any Input Tax Credit has remained unutilized, it shall not be utilised until it is scrutinized and approved by an appropriate or competent officer of the Department.iv. Only such approved Input Tax Credit shall be allowed to utilized thereafter for discharging future tax liability under the Act and Rules.v.