Appeal rejected, GST registration reinstated for Gazebo Hotel despite non-compliance.

The appeal against the cancellation of GST registration for M/s Gazebo Hotel and Resorts was rejected as the registration was reinstated by the jurisdictional authority, rendering the appeal moot. The cancellation was due to non-compliance with return filing requirements, despite the appellant's argument of missing the notice deadline due to their former accountant's error. The decision emphasized adherence to CGST Rules and procedural requirements for revocation, including filing all due returns before applying for revocation.

---

---

Issues:
Revocation of GST registration due to non-filing of returns, rejection of application for revocation, compliance with procedural requirements under CGST Rules, jurisdictional authority's action.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the cancellation of GST registration of M/s Gazebo Hotel and Resorts due to non-filing of returns for six months. The application for revocation was rejected for not submitting a reply to the show cause notice within the specified time. The appellant claimed to have completed all pending returns and requested an early hearing, but failed to attend the scheduled personal hearing.

Upon review, it was found that the registration was cancelled due to non-compliance with return filing requirements. The appellant argued that they missed the notice deadline due to an error by their former accountant. The CGST Rules, specifically Rule 23, outline the procedure for revocation of cancellation of registration, emphasizing the need to file all due returns and pay outstanding amounts before applying for revocation.

A circular by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs clarified the procedural requirements for revocation of registration post-cancellation. It highlighted the necessity of filing all due returns before applying for revocation. The appellant was expected to adhere to the guidelines outlined in the CGST Rules and the circular for revocation of the cancelled registration.

The adjudicating authority confirmed the active status of the GST registration, rendering the appeal moot. Consequently, the appeal was rejected due to the registration being reinstated by the jurisdictional authority. The decision was based on the fact that the registration was active, making the appeal unnecessary and hence, rejected.

---