https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786441 Cancellation of GST registration for a security-services provider was challenged; Rule 23(1) requires furnishing returns and payment of tax, interest, penalty and late fee before seeking revocation. The court held that limitation's purpose is to protect statutory compliance and third party rights, but non-revocation of GST registration primarily prejudices the assessee and not third parties or revenue. A writ court has inherent power to condone delay; the high court set aside the appellate dismissal made on limitation grounds and directed the appellate authority to rehear the appeal on merits and pass fresh orders on revocation. en-us Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Feb 2026 09:04:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786441 Cancellation of GST registration for a security-services provider was challenged; Rule 23(1) requires furnishing returns and payment of tax, interest, penalty and late fee before seeking revocation. The court held that limitation's purpose is to protect statutory compliance and third party rights, but non-revocation of GST registration primarily prejudices the assessee and not third parties or revenue. A writ court has inherent power to condone delay; the high court set aside the appellate dismissal made on limitation grounds and directed the appellate authority to rehear the appeal on merits and pass fresh orders on revocation. Case-Laws GST Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786441