GST registration revocation cannot be refused for delay alone when dues are paid, returns filed, and service of cancellation is unproven.

Rule 23 of the U.P. GST Rules, 2017 makes timely revocation depend on service of the cancellation order, and revocation cannot be rejected on delay alone where tax dues have been fully paid and returns filed. On the stated facts, the record did not establish proper service of the cancellation order, and the State did not dispute the assessee's factual assertions. In that setting, refusal to revive registration would serve no statutory purpose and would unnecessarily disrupt business continuity. The cancellation order and the appellate order were therefore quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the cancellation of GST registration and the rejection of the revocation application were sustainable when the assessee had deposited the tax dues and filed the returns, and the record did not establish proper service of the cancellation order.

Analysis: Rule 23 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 requires a revocation application to be made within the prescribed time after service of the cancellation order. The record showed that the assessee deposited the entire tax dues and filed the returns, and the State did not dispute the relevant factual assertions in the writ petition. There was also no categorical finding regarding service of the cancellation order on the assessee. In these circumstances, rejection of revocation only on the ground of delay in moving the application could not be sustained, particularly when the dues stood cleared and the registration cancellation would otherwise defeat business continuity without serving the statutory purpose.

Conclusion: The cancellation order and the appellate order were unsustainable and were quashed. The assessee succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where tax dues are paid, returns are filed, and service of the cancellation order is not established, revocation of GST registration cannot be refused merely on a technical plea of delay.

---