Patna High Court
M/S CGG ConstructionversusThe Union of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The writ application is dismissed.
Summary
M/S CGG Construction challenged the cancellation of its GST registration, which was effected on 06‑03‑2023 for failure to file returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner claimed he was unaware of the show‑cause notice due to lack of computer access and COVID‑related hardships, and argued that the cancellation was therefore unjust. An appeal was filed before the Additional Commissioner of State Tax after a delay of 21 months, but the appeal did not disclose any reasons for the delay or attach the requisite order. The Patna High Court observed that the writ petition was deficient in records, the delay was unexplained, and the ground for cancellation was not contested. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ application, while noting that the petitioner could still pursue a second appeal under Section 112 of the CGST/Bihar GST Act, 2017. The order thus upholds the cancellation and leaves the remedy of a statutory second appeal open.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition challenging the cancellation of GST registration is maintainable despite the 21‑month delay in filing the appeal and lack of supporting documents.
- Whether the High Court can entertain the petition when the ground for cancellation is not contested and procedural requirements are not fulfilled.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- GST registration
- cancellation
- show cause notice
- writ petition
- delay
- second appeal
- Section 112
- tax law
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3439 of 2026
======================================================
M/S CGG Construction through its Proprietor Rajesh Singh Male, Age About
58 Years, S/o Late Thakur Manoranjan Singh, R/o- village- Rajapara, P.S.
Pakur, Pakur, Jharkhand 816107 Having its registered office at Piprahi, P.S. -
Piprahi, Karkarwa, Sheohar, Bihar, 843329.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New
Delhi.
2. The Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Patna,
Bihar.
3. The Additional Commissioner State Tax, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
4. The Joint Commissioner of Custom, CGST and CX, Patna Central Circle,
Annexe Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna.
5. The Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Sitamarhi, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gaurav Prakash, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivek Pd., GP-7
Ms. Roona, AC to GP-7
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-7
For the UoI : Ms. Shilpi Keshri, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KUMAR MANISH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
2 19-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
GP-7 for the State.
2. The petitioner in this case is aggrieved by and
dissatisfied with the order passed by the Appellate Authority i.e.
the Additional Commissioner State Tax, Tirhut Division,
Muzzafarpur. Vide his order dated 17.04.2025, the Appellate
Authority has affirmed and upheld the order dated 06.03.2023
passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Sitamarhi Range.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3439 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026
2/3
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on
perusal of the order of cancellation of registration as contained in
Annexure- ‘P/1’, it would appear that the registration of the
petitioner has been cancelled w.e.f. 06.03.2023. The order of
cancellation of registration states that the same has got reference to
his reply dated 05.03.2023 in response to the notice to show cause
dated 02.02.2023 but in the next line, it is stated that no reply to
notice to show cause has been submitted.
4. Annexure- ‘P/2’ is the copy of the show cause notice
dated 02.02.2023 from which it appears that the cancellation of the
registration was proposed on the ground that the petitioner had
failed to furnish returns for a continuous period of six months.
5. In course of hearing of the writ application, this Court
has noticed that the reason shown in the order of cancellation is
not under challenge. The contention of the petitioner is that he was
not aware of the notice and the order issued and passed by
respondent no. 5 as he was not convergent with computer system.
The business was not in operation and several members of the
petitioner’s family were affected by corona virus. Therefore, in
March 2023, the professionals were entrusted with the task to look
into the taxation matter and to file the return. It is evident from the
averments made in the writ application that the petitioner does not
deny the reasons shown for cancellation of the registration of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.3439 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026
3/3
petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate
Authority with a delay of 21 months. The Form GST APL-01 in
which the appeal to the Appellate Authority has been preferred has
been enclosed as Annexure- ‘P/3’ to the writ application. This does
not contain any annexure on the record and the reason for delay
has not been placed before this Court. Even the order of the
Appellate Authority has not been enclosed with the writ
application.
6. In such circumstances, we refuse to entertain the writ
application. It is dismissed.
7. This Court would, however, record that dismissal of
the writ application would not come in his way in availing his
remedy, if any, by way of Second Appeal under Section 112 of the
Central Goods and Services Tax/Bihar Goods and Services Tax
Act, 2017 in accordance with law.
8. This writ application stands disposed of accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
( Kumar Manish, J)
Abhishek/-
lekhi/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.