☐ Has cancellation ground been identified (sub-s. (1) or (2))? ☐ Has pre-cancellation stock review been done? ☐ Has sub-s. (5) ITC vs output tax computation been performed? ☐ For voluntary, has REG-16 been filed? ☐ Has suspension…
29
☐ Has cancellation ground been identified (sub-s. (1) or (2))? ☐ Has pre-cancellation stock review been done? ☐ Has sub-s. (5) ITC vs output tax computation been performed? ☐ For voluntary, has REG-16 been filed? ☐ Has suspension…
Section 29 cancellation compliance — checklist (19 items)
Section 29 cancellation compliance — checklist (19 items)
☐ Has cancellation ground been identified (sub-s. (1) or (2))?
☐ Has pre-cancellation stock review been done?
☐ Has sub-s. (5) ITC vs output tax computation been performed?
☐ For voluntary, has REG-16 been filed?
☐ Has suspension framework during pendency been understood?
☐ On cancellation, has GSTR-10 been filed within 3 months?
☐ For officer-initiated, has SCN content been verified?
☐ Has opportunity of hearing been demanded?
☐ Has comprehensive response been prepared?
☐ For retrospective cancellation, has Suguna Cutpiece framework been applied?
☐ Has writ remedy been considered for adverse order?
☐ Has s. 30 revocation framework been coordinated?
☐ Has Mafatlal procedural-fairness framework been applied?
☐ Has Bharat Hi-Tech Builders + Maneka Gandhi natural-justice framework been observed?
☐ Has Mohit Minerals constitutional framework been applied?
☐ Has Whirlpool framework been invoked for writ?
☐ Has Bharti Airtel substance-over-form discipline been applied?
☐ Has the file been reviewed for audit-defensibility?
☐ Has coordination with broader compliance framework been done?
Worked examples — five live scenarios
Example 1 — Voluntary cancellation (business closure)
Facts: Business closing. Closing stock Rs. 10 lakh + ITC Rs. 1.8 lakh. Output tax if sold at MRP Rs. 12 lakh × 18% = Rs. 2.16 lakh.
Analysis: Sub-s. (1)(a) — voluntary. REG-16 filed. Sub-s. (5) — higher of ITC Rs. 1.8 lakh OR output tax Rs. 2.16 lakh — Rs. 2.16 lakh payable. GSTR-10 within 3 months.
Result: Voluntary cancellation + Rs. 2.16 lakh payment.
Example 2 — Non-filing cancellation
Facts: Taxpayer did not file GSTR-3B for 8 consecutive months. Officer issues SCN.
Analysis: Sub-s. (2)(c) — continuous non-filing. Rule 21 — 6-month threshold. Officer must afford hearing (sub-s. (2) proviso). Practitioner response — recent filing; request restoration. If cancellation upheld, s. 30 revocation framework.
Result: Procedural-fairness defence; restoration framework.
Example 3 — Retrospective cancellation
Facts: Officer cancels registration retrospectively from 1-Apr-2023, in 2025. Taxpayer challenges.
Analysis: Suguna Cutpiece (Madras HC 2022) framework — retrospective cancellation must follow due process. Verify SCN content + reasoned order. Practitioner files writ — procedural-fairness + Suguna Cutpiece framework. Recipient ITC complications cascading.
Result: Retrospective cancellation subject to procedural-fairness discipline.
Example 4 — Fraud / wilful misstatement
Facts: Officer alleges registration obtained through fraud. SCN issued.
Analysis: Sub-s. (2)(e) ground. Comprehensive procedural-fairness — SCN, hearing, response, reasoned order. Practitioner defence — verify factual allegations; substantive merits; natural-justice compliance.
Result: Substantive + procedural defence framework.
Example 5 — Amalgamation cancellation
Facts: Two companies amalgamate. Transferor's registration cancelled; transferee operates under sub-s. (4) of s. 22 framework.
Analysis: Sub-s. (1)(a) — amalgamation. REG-16 + ITC-02 transfer to transferee + cancellation of transferor. Sub-s. (5) ITC computation moot (transferred to successor). Coordinated framework.
Result: Cancellation + transfer framework coordinated.
Planning and litigation strategy
Litigation defence
Cross-references