The Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed the revival of a government contractor’s GST registration despite the dismissal of his statutory appeal on the ground of limitation, holding that the registration may be restored upon payment of the entire outstanding tax, interest, late fee, and penalty within a stipulated timeline.
The Bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Ranjan Sharma has directed the GST authorities to restore the petitioner’s registration with its original GST registration number, subject to strict compliance with specified conditions. The department was directed to reopen the GST portal to facilitate payment of the outstanding dues.
The petitioner, a proprietorship concern engaged as a government contractor in Himachal Pradesh, challenged two orders before the High Court. The first was an order cancelling its GST registration, while the second was an appellate order dismissing its appeal solely on the ground that it had been filed beyond the prescribed limitation period.
Buy Now: GST Judgements E-Compilation – June 2026
The GST registration had been cancelled after the petitioner defaulted in payment of tax and failed to comply with statutory requirements under the CGST Rules. The petitioner also did not seek revocation of cancellation or file an appeal within the period prescribed under the CGST Act.
The High Court acknowledged that the appellate authority had acted correctly in dismissing the appeal as time-barred. It observed that Section 107 of the CGST Act prescribes a specific period within which an appeal can be filed and also limits the authority’s power to condone delay.
The Bench noted that once the maximum condonable period prescribed by the statute expires, the appellate authority has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal beyond that limit. Accordingly, the appellate authority was legally justified in refusing to condone the delay.
Before the High Court, the petitioner submitted that it was a government contractor generating local employment and contributing to infrastructure development in the State. It explained that severe liquidity constraints prevented timely filing of GST returns and payment of tax.
The petitioner further informed the Court that the tax liability up to the date of cancellation had already been discharged and expressed readiness to pay any remaining dues, including applicable interest, late fee, and penalty. It requested restoration of the GST registration to enable continuation of its business.
The State did not file any reply opposing the writ petition. Instead, it conveyed that it had no objection to restoration of the registration, provided the petitioner cleared the entire tax liability together with statutory interest, late fee, penalty, and other dues payable under the GST law.
Taking note of the peculiar facts of the case and the petitioner’s willingness to regularise all defaults, the High Court exercised its writ jurisdiction and set aside both the cancellation order and the appellate order.
The Court further directed the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) to quantify the petitioner’s total liability, including any penalty, on or before 7 August 2026. The petitioner was directed to deposit the quantified amount on or before 16 August 2026.
Additionally, the petitioner was instructed to complete all statutory formalities and ensure timely filing of GST returns and payment of taxes in the future to avoid recurrence of such defaults.
Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy
To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.
