High Court of Madhya Pradesh6 July 2026

PVCON Engineering v. CGST and Central Excise Bhopal

For revenue

WRIT PETITION NO. 24931 OF 2026

The ruling in brief

Where petitioner construction contractor challenged penalty order for alleged irregular input tax credit on grounds of natural justice and jurisdiction after appeal was dismissed on limitation, since statutory appeal before GST Tribunal was enabled with additional grace period and Tribunal was competent to examine factual and legal grounds, writ petition under Article 226 could not substitute appellate remedy and same was to be dismissed with liberty to approach Tribunal

Provisions considered

Section 112 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Article 226 of Constitution of India, 1950

This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.

The ruling in brief

Related rulings

GSTAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2026

For revenue

Ashwini Malhotra v. Commissioner of Central Tax, CGST Commissionerate

Where appellant, as Managing Director, faced personal penalty of Rs 25,000 each under section 122(3) for two company units and total amount determined against appellant did not exceed Rs 50,000, Tribunal exercised statutory discretion to refuse admission as threshold requirement was not met, resulting in dismissal of appeal

CGST S.112

GSTAT Ghaziabad17 Sept 2026

For assessee

Prashant Kumar Rai v. Highly Marelli Motherson Thermal Solution Private

Where Revenue filed appeal before GSTAT against quashing of IGST penalty of Rs. 5,78,160, same was held inadmissible as Circular No. 2425008 dated 5-7-2024 prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs for departmental appeals and Revenue failed to establish that case fell within any specified exclusion or exception, consequently appeal was to be dismissed without adjudication on merits

GSTAT Ghaziabad17 Sept 2026

For assessee

Devendra Singh v. Adroit Technical Services (P.) Ltd

Where department filed appeal where GST amount in dispute was only Rs. 1.99 lakh while monetary threshold limit set for filing appeal by relevant circulars is Rs. 20 lak, since Revenue failed to prove any exception that would allow a low-value claim to proceed, appeal was to be dismissed at threshold without adjudication on merits

PVCON Engineering v. CGST and Central Excise Bhopal

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

PVCON Engineering v. CGST and Central Excise Bhopal

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Read the full analysis

Ashwini Malhotra v. Commissioner of Central Tax, CGST Commissionerate

Prashant Kumar Rai v. Highly Marelli Motherson Thermal Solution Private

Devendra Singh v. Adroit Technical Services (P.) Ltd

Read the full analysis