GST Registration Cancellation Quashed for Vague SCN

Case Details: Smt. Sunita Rai vs. Union of India [2026] 187 taxmann.com 791 (Gauhati)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

Manish Choudhury, J.
Ms B. Sarma, Adv. for the Petitioner.
B. Sharma, Central Govt. Counsel, S.C. Keyal, Sr. Counsel & Ms P. Upadhyay, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was a proprietor engaged in providing light motor vehicles on hire and was registered under the CGST Act and the Assam GST Act. A show-cause notice was issued proposing cancellation of the GST registration on the grounds of failure to furnish returns for six months, while also fixing a personal hearing and suspending the registration. The petitioner contended that the show-cause notice failed to specify the particular months or period for which returns had allegedly not been furnished, thereby depriving her of an effective opportunity to respond. It was submitted that the cancellation order issued merely stated “Others Remarks: taxpayer has not filed GSTR-3B returns and no reply SCN,” despite the accompanying Statement Table recording no tax, interest, penalty, fee or cess liability. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that Section 29 of the CGST Act and the Assam GST Act, read with Rule 22 of the CGST Rules and the Assam GST Rules, required strict compliance with the prescribed procedure for cancellation of GST registration. The Court held that the show-cause notice lacked material particulars and that the cancellation order in FORM GST REG-19 was non-speaking, contrary to the statutory requirement of recording reasons. It further held that non-submission of a reply did not absolve the jurisdictional officer under CGST from passing a reasoned order, as recording reasons formed part of the statutory mandate and the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the impugned cancellation order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration in accordance with the law.