High Court of Telangana
JK Technology v. Deputy State Tax Officer
WRIT PETITION NO. 21690 OF 2026
High Court of Telangana
WRIT PETITION NO. 21690 OF 2026
Where registration was cancelled for non-furnishing of returns though SCN alleged fraud, such cancellation was invalid as order rested on a ground not mentioned in SCN, breaching requirement to specify precise grounds with material, therefore SCN and cancellation order were quashed and GST registration was restored, with liberty to issue fresh SCN on proper grounds with supporting documents
Section 29 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Rule 22 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017/Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.
Members
The background, the issue before the court and the reasoning behind the decision are free for members — along with the professional discussion on this ruling.
Free to join. No card required.
Already a member? Sign in
Calcutta High Court
Where registration was cancelled due to non-updation of bank details following separation from joint account, and no fraud or evasion was alleged, such lapse was curable by furnishing correct particulars, thus one opportunity to prove bona fide was warranted and cancellation was quashed subject to compliance, pending returns and dues being filed for restoration of registration
Gujarat High Court
Where tax authority cancelled registration of assessee-firm retrospectively citing fraud or suppression but failed to consider request for more time to submit key documents, and passed order without deciding on such request or examining supporting evidence, such cancellation violated principles of natural justice and was set aside. GST: Where petitioners' registration cancellation was followed by revocation proceedings requiring immediate payment via DRC-03 and rejection relied on purchases from dealers whose registration was cancelled suo motu without prior notice to petitioners, imposition of payment and reliance on uncommunicated grounds amounted to jurisdictional overreach, rendering rejection order unsustainable and liable to be quashed. GST: Where registration was cancelled and revocation was rejected, but appellate authority introduced new grounds beyond original show cause notice, and opportunity to submit documents was denied at cancellation stage, such orders were quashed as non-application of mind and prejudicial amalgamation of issues warranted setting aside of cancellation and appeal with liberty to initiate fresh proceedings with due process
Gauhati High Court
Where GST registration of transport service provider was cancelled for continuous non-filing of returns and period for seeking revocation had expired, cancellation order was to be set aside and registration was to be restored subject to filing all pending returns within 30 days and petitioner remained liable for tax, interest, penalty and late fees