High Court of Madras1 June 2026

Tvl. Kodeeswaran Jewellers v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

For assessee

W.A.(MD) NO. 774 OF 2026

The ruling in brief

Where assessment order was communicated solely by uploading on portal without other statutory modes and appellant, a small business, cited difficulty in accessing the portal, expectation to continuously monitor portal was unreasonable, thus, appellant was entitled to an extended opportunity to file appeal within fifteen days and have appeal decided on merits

Provisions considered

Section 169, read with section 107, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

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

Delhi High Court16 Sept 2026

For revenue

Katyani Exports v. Union of India

Where DGGI issued composite show-cause notice to 146 noticees in proceedings relating to alleged IGST refund and ITC fraud, Notification No. 2/2017 as amended by Notification No. 2/2022 was held to validly confer pan-India jurisdiction on officers for DGGI SCNs and circular allocating competent adjudicating officer was held to merely regulate allocation without conferring jurisdiction, therefore jurisdictional challenge was to be rejected GST: Where composite SCN arising from DGGI investigation was assigned to common adjudicating authority based on highest amount of demand criterion, such criterion was held objective, quantifiable and uniformly applicable with rational nexus to single and consistent adjudication of one cause, and its application did not involve impermissible sub-delegation or enlargement of jurisdiction GST: Where Additional Commissioner, CGST, Delhi acting as common adjudicating authority passed order against Haryana-registered petitioners, appellate forum was held to lie before Commissioner (Appeals) of Commissionerate where common adjudicating authority was posted as already notified under Table III of Notification No. 2/2017 and clarificatory circular merely reiterated said position

Rajasthan High Court20 Aug 2026

For assessee

New Godara Trading Co. v. State of Rajasthan

Where petitioner’s statutory appeal delay was due to non-communication by CA not attributable to petitioner, and refusal to consider appeal on merits would cause serious prejudice, delay in filing was condoned and Appellate Authority was directed to hear appeal on merits

CGST S.107

Karnataka High Court15 Sept 2026

For assessee

Lazard Infrastructure LLP v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Where supplier LLP's ITC was blocked on GST portal without prior intimation or pre-decisional hearing and basis for blocking was only an advisory communication pending verification, mechanical blocking without affording hearing was unjustified, thus requiring ITC to be unblocked forthwith and permitting fresh proceedings only after due notice and opportunity of hearing to assessee

Related rulings

Delhi High Court16 Sept 2026

For revenue

Katyani Exports v. Union of India

Rajasthan High Court20 Aug 2026

For assessee

New Godara Trading Co. v. State of Rajasthan

CGST S.107

Karnataka High Court15 Sept 2026

For assessee

Tvl. Kodeeswaran Jewellers v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Tvl. Kodeeswaran Jewellers v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Read the full analysis

Katyani Exports v. Union of India

New Godara Trading Co. v. State of Rajasthan

Lazard Infrastructure LLP v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Read the full analysis