1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 13763 of 2024 Date of Decision: 09.10.2025 Ved Ram ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P & Others ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Additional Advocate General Vivek Singh Thakur,Judge (oral) The petitioner has approached this Court for setting aside order dated 17.06.2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner State Taxes and Excise (Annexure P-4) canceling registration of GST Goods and Services Tax Registration Number of the petitioner debarring him from paying tax under GST Act. 2. Admittedly, the petitioner was in default in making payment of tax to the Department and resultantly Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 show cause notice for cancellation of registration under Rule 22 (1) read with Sub Rule 2(A) of Rule 21(A) of the CGST Rule was issued on 24.05.2023, whereby registration of petitioner was suspended w.e.f 24.5.2023. For failure in depositing the tax, order dated 17.6.2023 for cancellation of registration of petitioner was passed. 3. Though impugned order was an appealable order under Section 107 of CGST Act 2017 but the said appeal was to be preferred within three months from the date of passing of the order as provided under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act. The fresh appeal/revision may have also been preferred after expiry of three months but within one month thereafter as provided under Section 107(4) of the CGST Act. 4. Once outer limit of period, which can be condoned by the authority, has been prescribed under the Act, the Appellate Authority is not competent to condone the delay beyond the one month after expiry of three months. 5. Admittedly, petitioner has also not filed any application under Section 30 or appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act for revocation of cancellation of registration within the limitation period prescribed for that. 3 6. In aforesaid back ground, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Class -D Government Contractor and his only source of income to earn his livelihood is contractorship and further that due to unavoidable, inevitable circumstances, he could not paid tax within time but now he has already paid tax payable before the date of cancellation of registration and he has also ready to pay tax dues along with applicable interest and late fee as well as penalty, if any,leviable under the relevant provisions of the Act and Rules. 7. It has also been submitted that cancellation order deserves to dropped with direction to respondents for continuing the registration of GST 8. No reply has been filed on behalf of State to the petition rather no objection has been communicate for allowing the petition but subject to payment of all payable tax along with interest, late fee and penalty etc. as payable under the relevant Act and Rules. 9 In aforesaid facts and circumstances, order dated 17.6.2023, passed for cancellation of registration of the petitioner is set aside and the concerned authority is directed to revive the registration of the petitioner to its original 4 status with original number but subject to payment of entire tax payable for the relevant period along with interest, late fee and penalty leviable upon by depositing the same on or before 15.11.2025 for which necessary arrangement shall be made by the respondents by opening the portal so as to enable the petitioner to deposit the requisite amount with the department. 10. The petitioner is directed to complete all codal formalities required for depositing the arrears of the tax and also to ensure regular filing of returns as well as payment of tax in future. With aforesaid direction, petition is disposed of. Pending application(s) if any, shall also stands disposed of. (Vivek Singh Thakur) (Judge) (Romesh Verma) Judge 9th October, 2025(veena) 5