Revocation of GST Registration Cannot Be Denied on New Grounds Not Mentioned in Cancellation Order: Uttarakhand HC [Read Order]

The Uttarakhand High Court has granted a fresh opportunity for the revocation of GST registration to a taxpayer, setting aside the rejection order after observing that the Proper Officer had rejected the revocation application on grounds entirely different from the reasons cited for the original cancellation of the registration.

M/s R B Enterprises, the petitioner, approached the Court challenging the order dated August 20, 2025, which rejected their application for revocation of GST registration cancellation, as well as the subsequent Order-in-Appeal dated February 16, 2026. The petitioner sought a direction for the reconsideration of their representation, expressing willingness to file all defaulted returns and clear outstanding dues, including tax, interest, and penalty.

The Court noted a significant procedural discrepancy in the orders passed by the Revenue Department. The original order cancelling the GST registration (dated June 30, 2025) was passed on the ground that the petitioner had failed to file returns for a continuous period of six months. However, the application for revocation of this cancellation was rejected on a completely different ground namely, a discrepancy between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A.

The Standing Counsel for the Revenue argued that the petitioner's appeal against the lower authority's order had already been dismissed by the Appellate Authority on February 16, 2026, and thus the relief sought was not admissible.

The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay, observed that the Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of limitation and not on merits. Noting that the revocation application was rejected on a new ground not related to the original cancellation, and considering the petitioner’s willingness to deposit the entire tax amount along with interest and penalty, the Court held that the petitioner should be given liberty to apply for revocation afresh.

The High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file all returns and deposit the entire tax amount along with penalty and interest within two weeks. The Court directed the Proper Officer to consider the fresh representation and decide on it within four weeks of filing.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates