The Allahabad High Court has quashed orders cancelling a GST registration under Rule 21(d) of the CGST Rules for violation of Rule 10A (non-furnishing of bank details), holding that in framing Rule 21, the rules have gone beyond the mandate of Section 29 of the GST Act. Justice Pankaj Bhatia, in Writ Tax No. 584 of 2026 (M/s Swastik Management vs. Addl. Commissioner, decided 16.04.2026), also set aside the consequential appellate order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The petitioner's registration was cancelled on 05.02.2025 on the ground that the petitioner violated Rule 10A by not providing bank details. The appeal was dismissed as beyond limitation. The petitioner argued that Section 29 of the GST Act enumerates specific circumstances under which registration can be cancelled, and the power to make rules under Section 164 is limited to carrying out the provisions of the Act — whereas Rule 21 specifies events that are not even contemplated in Section 29. Additionally, no reason whatsoever was recorded while passing the cancellation order, which was held to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution following the Court's earlier ruling in M/s Chandra Sain (2022). Both the cancellation order and the appellate order were quashed, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after providing hearing.
• 2026-juristway.com-1048-HC(Allahabad)-GST | High Court of Allahabad | Writ Tax No. 584 of 2026 | 16.04.2026