Delhi High Court Disposes Writ Against Retrospective GST Cancellation, Directs Revocation Application Under Section 30 Of CGST Act
The Case
ASHMA BANO PROPRIETOR OF M/S. ASHIANA METAL TRADING COMPANY Vs SUPERINTENDENT, RANGE 170, CGST DELHI & ANR.
Case No.: W.P.(C)/12919/2026
Decided on: 09/17/2026
CNR: DLHC010419132026 ·
High Court of Delhi
The Legal Issue
The Petitioner sought quashing of the Order dated 10.11.2025, whereby the Petitioner's Goods and Services Tax (GST) Registration was cancelled retrospectively with effect from 07.12.2017. The Court considered whether to entertain the writ petition given that the Petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an application for revocation of the retrospective cancellation under Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act).
Facts of the Case
The Petitioner's GST Registration was cancelled retrospectively with effect from 07.12.2017 by an Order dated 10.11.2025. The Petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking quashing of that Order. The GST Department submitted that the Petitioner had availed ineligible Input Tax Credit (ITC) and that the Petitioner's firm was found to be non-existent when Department officials visited the premises. The Petitioner contended that she has been carrying on her business and had furnished the Global Positioning System (GPS) location while replying to the Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 08.10.2025.
Summary of the Decision
The Court noted that the Petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an application for revocation of the retrospective cancellation under Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). It observed that the issues raised involve questions of fact, which are required to be examined by the competent authority. In view of the aforesaid, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Petitioner to file an application for revocation within a period of two weeks from today. The said application shall be decided on merits within a period of one month from the date of its filing. The Court did not quash the Order dated 10.11.2025.
This digest is for quick reference only and is not legal advice. Always verify against the full judgment.