Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010069222026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1970/2026 SARDA ECO POWER LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT JESMINE RESIDENCY,, HOUSE NO. 26, OPP. S.B.I. REHABARI BRANCH, SANTI RAM DAS PATH, REHABARI, GUWAHATI- 781008 AND IN THE INSTANT PETITION IS REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SHRI CHURUKANTI ASHOK REDDY, SON OF LATE YELLA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDENT OF JASMINE RESIDENCY, HOUSE NO 26, OPP- SBI REHABARI BRANCH,, SANTI RAM DAS PATH, REHABARI, GUWAHATI- 781008 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SCERETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, FINANCE AND TAXATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006, ASSAM 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 ASSAM 3:DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXES GUWAHATI ZONE-C KAR BHAWAN G.S.ROAD DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 Page No.# 2/5 4:ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES GUWAHATI UNIT-D NEW KAR BHAWAN G.S.ROAD DISPUR GUWAHATI- 78100 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates for the petitioner(s) :Mr. GN Sahewalla, Senior Advocate Mr. M Sahewalla Advocates for the respondent(s) :Mr. B Gogoi, Addl.AG, Assam & Standing Counsel Finance and Taxation Dept. Govt. of Assam Date on which Judgment is reserved : NA Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 06.04.2026 Whether the Pronouncement is of the : NA Operative Part of the Judgment Whether the Full Judgment has been : Yes Pronounced JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL) Page No.# 3/5 Heard Mr. GN Sahewalla, the learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. M Sahewalla, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. B Gogoi, the learned Addl. AG, Assam for the respondents. 2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the cancellation of its registration in terms with Section 29 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the CGST Act of 2017’). It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner could not file any application seeking revocation of the cancellation of the registration, within 30 days as prescribed under Section 30 of the Assam Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. It is under such circumstances the petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition seeking restoration of its GST registration. 3. The materials on record reveal that the petitioner herein is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of providing Electrical Contractors Services and Electricians Services and is represented by its Director Shri Churukanti Ashok Reddy is a registered Assessee under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘CGST Act of 2017’)/Assam Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the AGST Act of 2017). The petitioner has obtained a registration under the CGST Act of 2017 and was provided with the Unique ID bearing GST Registration No.18AALCS1964RIZE. 4. On account of non-submission of the returns, which is required in terms with Section 39 of the CGST Act of 2017 (which the petitioner does not deny in the instant petition), a show cause notice was issued on 13.11.2023 asking the petitioner as to why his registration should not be cancelled. In addition to that, it was also mentioned that his registration shall stand suspended from 13.11.2023. Page No.# 4/5 5. Mr. GN Sahewala, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not well conversant with the provisions of GST online portal. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was never granted any opportunity of hearing. It was the respondent No.3 who had issued the show cause notice dated 13.11.2023 and the petitioner was granted 30 days time to file the reply as to why the returns were not filed for a continuous period of 6(six) months. However, in the said show cause notice the period of default was not mentioned and within a period of 30 days, the petitioners GST Registration was cancelled without hearing and assigning any reasons except for the fact that the petitioner did not submit any reply to the show cause notice. 6. The record also reveals that the petitioner, thereupon, could not file an application seeking revocation of the cancellation of the registration due to lapse of time. In this regard, this Court finds it very pertinent to take note of that the issue involved in the instant proceedings is no longer res integra, taking into account that this Court had already dealt with similar issues in the case of Motaleb Bhuyan Vs. The State Of Assam And Ors, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1429. 7. It is the opinion of this Court that similar directions which have been passed at paragraph No.50 of the said judgment can be passed in the instant proceedings. Accordingly, the instant writ petition, therefore, stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i). The order of cancellation of registration dated 14.12.2023 is set aside and quashed. (ii). The petitioner herein is directed to file the returns for the period Page No.# 5/5 from the date the petitioner had failed to file the returns till date, within 30 days from the date of the instant order. (iii). The period as stipulated in Section 73(10) of the CGST Act of 2017 shall be computed from the date of the instant judgment, except for the financial year 2025-26, which shall be as per Section 44 of the CGST Act of 2017. (iv). The petitioner herein also shall be liable to make payment of the arrears i.e. tax, penalty, interest and late fees. 8. With the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant