Whether registration under GST can be granted retrospectively?

Yes, GST registration can be granted retrospectively, but only within the statutory framework of the CGST Act. Retrospective registration is permissible either

(i) voluntarily at the request of the taxpayer from the date on which he became liable to register, or

(ii) by the Proper Officer, usually while cancelling registration or detecting tax evasion.

However, retrospective effect cannot be arbitrary and must comply with principles of natural justice.

Legal Provision:
Section 25(1) – CGST Act, 2017

“Every person who is liable to be registered under section 22 or section 24 shall apply for registration within thirty days from the date on which he becomes liable to registration…”

Section 25(11) – CGST Act, 2017

“A certificate of registration shall be issued in such form, with effect from such date, as may be prescribed.”

Rule 10(2) – CGST Rules, 2017

“The registration shall be effective from the date on which the person becomes liable to registration if the application is submitted within the period prescribed…”

Section 29(2) – CGST Act, 2017

“The Proper Officer may cancel the registration from such date, including any retrospective date, as he may deem fit…”

Analysis:
1. Statutory Scheme of Retrospective Registration

The GST law recognizes two distinct but often confused concepts:

1. Retrospective grant of registration, and

2. Retrospective cancellation of registration.

Under Section 25 read with Rule 10, registration is ordinarily granted from:

• the date of liability (if applied within time), or

• the date of application (if applied belatedly).

Thus, when a taxpayer applies late but demonstrates that he was liable earlier, the registration itself operates retrospectively from the date of liability. This is common in cases of inter-State supply or compulsory registration under Section 24.

2. Officer-Initiated Retrospective Effect

Although Section 25 does not expressly use the phrase “retrospective registration”, Section 29(2) empowers the Proper Officer to cancel registration retrospectively. Courts have consistently held that if the law permits retrospective cancellation, the consequential tax liability for the prior period can only be enforced if the person is treated as a registered person for that period.

In my litigation practice before the Patna High Court, retrospective tax demands are frequently raised where the department alleges suppression of turnover or bogus firms. Such demands implicitly rest on retrospective recognition of registration liability.

3. Limits on Retrospective Operation

Retrospective registration or its consequences are not automatic and must satisfy:

• Issuance of show cause notice (SCN)

• Clear mention of proposed effective date

• Opportunity of personal hearing

Arbitrary retrospective action—especially without recording reasons—has been repeatedly frowned upon by constitutional courts.

While drafting writ petitions in GST cancellation matters in Bihar, a common ground is that the Proper Officer mechanically assigns a retrospective date without analyzing when the liability actually arose.

4. Practical Scenarios Where Retrospective Registration Arises

• Belated GST application after crossing threshold

• Detection of inter-State supplies without registration

• E-way bill based investigation

• Bogus or cancelled registration revived by appellate authority

In such cases, retrospective effect is often granted to protect revenue interest, but courts insist on reasoned exercise of power.

5. Remedy Against Arbitrary Retrospective Action

An aggrieved taxpayer may:

• File appeal under Section 107 within limitation

• Seek writ remedy under Article 226 if principles of natural justice are violated

The Patna High Court has consistently entertained writs where retrospective dates were fixed without justification.

Case Law Precedents:
Supreme Court

• Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India
  The Supreme Court emphasized that fiscal statutes, even when revenue-oriented, must comply with fairness and proportionality.

Across jurisdictions, courts agree that retrospective effect is permissible but not unbridled.

Note for Bihar Filers:

In Bihar, GST authorities frequently rely on e-way bill analytics and bank transaction mapping to justify retrospective liability. Taxpayers should maintain documentary proof of the exact date of commencement of taxable activity, as this becomes decisive when contesting retrospective registration or tax demands before appellate authorities or the Patna High Court.

Note from the Author:
This response is for informational and educational purposes based on the GST law and judicial precedents available as of 2026. Practitioners are advised to verify the latest Notifications, Circulars, and judgments before filing or advising.

— Adv. Tabish Ahmad
Advocate, Patna High Court
LLM (Taxation), MBA (Finance)