GST registration amendment and change of management impact on tax registration; authority ordered to reconsider application and restore opportunity.

Amendment and cancellation of a GST registration arising during a corporate insolvency resolution process were challenged on grounds that the tax authority failed to recognise the replacement management installed by the NCLT. The court found the tax authority proceeded on the incorrect premise that the old management remained in control and concluded that the registration cancellation and rejection of amendment must be set aside. The consequence is that the tax authority must reconsider the petitioner's amendment application afresh and decide on objections within three weeks, permitting the new management an opportunity to seek restoration or amendment of the registration certificate.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent's proceedings dated 13.11.2025 (rejecting amendment of GST registration) and 14.11.2025 (cancelling GST registration), which proceeded on the premise that the old management continued to run the company despite a new management appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal after a corporate insolvency resolution process, were valid and liable to be set aside.

Analysis: The impugned decisions treated the petitioner as if the prior management remained in control despite orders in a properly constituted corporate insolvency resolution process effecting a change of management. Under the facts, the change in management flowed from orders of the National Company Law Tribunal and corresponded with restoration of the petitioner's registration; the respondent's refusal to consider the amendment application and subsequent cancellation proceeded without accepting or treating the effect of the insolvency resolution process on management and registration. In those circumstances, the respondent's actions required fresh consideration of the petitioner's amendment application in light of the new management and the supporting NCLT mandate. The respondent retains the regulatory power to act on any future violations of the GST law, but the present administrative determinations could not stand without a fresh, management-aware assessment.

Conclusion: The proceedings dated 13.11.2025 and 14.11.2025 are set aside and the respondent is directed to reconsider the petitioner's amendment application dated 03.11.2025 and pass orders within three weeks; the decision is favourable to the petitioner (assessee).

---