GST registration restoration cannot be withheld merely because a revenue appeal is pending without any stay.

Mere filing of a revenue appeal against an appellate order restoring GST registration does not operate as an automatic stay of that order. Where the appellate authority has directed restoration and no stay has been granted, the department must comply and cannot withhold reinstatement on the basis of pendency alone. Continued non-restoration in such circumstances is arbitrary and unreasonable. The refusal to restore the GST registration was therefore unsustainable, and restoration was due forthwith.

---

---

Issues: Whether the filing of an appeal by the revenue against an appellate order restoring GST registration stayed the operation of that order and justified withholding restoration of the registration.

Analysis: The appellate authority had set aside the order refusing revocation of cancellation and had positively directed restoration of the petitioner's GST registration. Mere pendency of the revenue's appeal did not amount to an automatic stay of that appellate order. In the absence of any stay, there was no legal basis to refuse compliance with the direction to restore the registration. The continued non-restoration of the registration, despite the appellate order, was found arbitrary and unreasonable.

Conclusion: The refusal to restore the GST registration was unsustainable. The petitioner was entitled to restoration of registration forthwith.

---