Case laws · TaxKatha

Gauhati High Court3 Aug 2026

For revenue

Gias Uddin Ahmed v. Union of India

Where DGGI officer issued a consolidated demand-cum-show cause notice covering multiple financial years under CGST regime and petitioners challenged permissibility of such consolidation after not filing a reply, since law as per Tata Projects Ltd. permits consolidated notices and adjudication for multiple periods, writ challenge to such consolidated notice was not maintainable. GST: Where petitioners received consolidated show cause notice for tax or ITC not involving fraud and failed to reply before seeking writ remedy nearly a year later, since initiation under general or fraud-based provisions is fact-specific and determination of fraud requires factual examination, writ jurisdiction was not maintainable at notice stage and parties must pursue statutory adjudication and appeals

Gauhati High Court3 Aug 2026

For revenue

Gias Uddin Ahmed v. Union of India

Delhi High Court3 Aug 2026

For revenue

Armour Security India Ltd. v. Union of India

Where petitioner challenged SCN and order-in-original alleging tax not paid and fraud-related demand under CGST after being heard and afforded detailed adjudication, existence of effective statutory appellate remedy before Appellate Authority meant writ could not be entertained, and questions of fact or competing statutory provisions including period-specific applicability were to be decided in statutory appeal

Himachal Pradesh High Court31 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Vasanta Resorts and Spa (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

Where retrospective amendment to Section 17(5)(d) was challenged by filing belated appeal, though Appellate Authority lacked power to condone delay beyond statutory limit, High Court set aside dismissal of appeal as time-barred and remanded matter for fresh decision on merits

Bombay High Court27 Jul 2026

For assessee

Green Woods v. Union of India

Where petitioner deposited substantial amount during investigation and rectified shortfall in statutory pre-deposit before appellate order, dismissal of appeal for non-payment of initial pre-deposit was unsustainable since procedural defects in filing requirements are curable, thus impugned appellate order was set aside and appeal restored for decision on merits

Punjab & Haryana High Court21 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh

Where show cause notice or order in original was served only by uploading it under the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on GST portal without acknowledgment or reply by assessee, such upload did not constitute valid service and ex parte proceedings were liable to be restored to the stage of issuance of show cause notice and in cases were appeals were dismissed on grounds of limitation, such appeals were to be restored on its original numbers

Rajasthan High Court20 Jul 2026

For assessee

Bhagwati Industries v. Union of India

Where appeal against OIO could not be filed within limitation due to lack of knowledge of GST portal, appellate procedure and non-communication of order except by portal upload, delay was liable to be condoned in writ jurisdiction and appellate authority was to be directed to entertain appeal if filed within 30 days

CGST S.107

Uttarakhand High Court17 Jul 2026

For revenue

Radhika Furniture @ Radha Devi v. Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax

Where assessees' appeals under Section 107 were dismissed as time-barred and sought condonation beyond statutory limits invoking Section 5 read with Section 29(2) of Limitation Act, since GST is a special fiscal statute prescribing specific limitation with restricted condonation, Section 5 stood excluded by necessary implication and appeals beyond prescribed period could not be entertained

Gauhati High Court17 Jul 2026

For revenue

North East Petrochemicals v. Union of India

Where Proper Officer issued a consolidated show cause notice and passed a single order covering multiple financial years for confirming tax, interest and penalty, issuance of such consolidated notice and order was within jurisdiction and authority, and challenge to competence on this ground was not sustainable with merits of the order left open for statutory appeal

Patna High Court17 Jul 2026

For revenue

Umagaurav (P.) Ltd. v. State of Bihar

Challenge to ex parte GST demand failed where SCN and reminders were issued through portal and registered e-mail, containing specific ITC mismatch figures; petitioner neither categorically denied e-mail receipt nor disclosed correct GSTR-2A ITC, and bare allegations of non-service and denial of hearing lacked credibility. GST: Writ challenging ex parte DRC-07 demand was not maintainable where petitioner failed to avail statutory appeal, voluntarily undertook to pay dues and issued post-dated cheques to secure de-attachment, later dishonoured; having benefited from de-attachment without protest or duress, petitioner was estopped and lacked bona fides to invoke Article 226

Patna High Court16 Jul 2026

For assessee

Rajnish Kumar v. Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise

Where petitioner challenged adjudication and recovery orders by writ, withdrawal was permitted with liberty to file statutory appeal before Appellate Authority, excluding period spent in writ from limitation computation and allowing condonation, but re-agitation of previously adjudicated contention was not permitted, while all other contentions remained open for appeal consideration. GST: Where petitioner sought refund of tax recovered during statutory appeal period but filed writ after three months and only within the condonable one-month period, writ registration after defect removal did not cure limitation default, and refund was denied as petitioner failed to approach authority within statutory appeal window prescribed for remedy

Calcutta High Court16 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Raju Ghosh v. State of West Bengal

Where adjudication order and related notices were uploaded only under portal tab 'Additional Notices and Orders' resulting in petitioner being unaware and not given effective hearing, action of recovery from Electronic Credit Ledger and subsequent orders amounted to violation of natural justice, so all such orders and recovery notices were quashed and matter was remitted for fresh hearing

Calcutta High Court16 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Raju Ghosh v. State of WB

Where show cause notice for tax periods was improperly served electronically under a portal tab not reasonably expected to provide notice, resulting in petitioner remaining unaware until recovery proceedings and appeal was dismissed as time-barred without merits, denial of natural justice was established, delay explained, and appellate order was quashed with direction to decide appeal on merits

Delhi High Court15 Jul 2026

For revenue

Sodexo India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

Where assessee, after participating in audit and adjudication and filing detailed replies with documents, challenged an order-in-original via writ on grounds of non- consideration of reply and failure to seek additional documents, since adequate opportunity was provided and alternative appellate remedy under section 107 existed, no exceptional circumstance justified writ interference and complaint pertained to merits not natural justice

Orissa High Court15 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Magnum Estates (P.) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner, GST (Appeals)

Where assessee's appeal faced statutory pre-deposit difficulties due to misclassification of interest as tax in DRC-07 and rectification was time-barred, remanding case to Appellate Authority for fresh hearing was necessary since relegating assessee to GSTAT appeal would not serve justice and disputed matters on ITC reversal, interest and penalty required reconsideration on merits

Delhi High Court13 Jul 2026

For revenue

Karamsar Poultry Appliances v. Assistant Commissioner, Janakpuri Division, CGST Delhi West

Where assessee applied for refund of unutilized ITC while SCN proposed partial rejection and OIO partially sanctioned refund and rejected balance while OIA set aside OIO to extent of wrongful rejection without mandating unconditional release or foreclosing further examination; since a subsequent order rejected refund, proper course was statutory appeal to test reasons and scope and effect of OIA GST: Where petitioner challenged rejection of refund of unutilized ITC, statutory appeal remedy being available, writ interference was not warranted; liberty was granted to pursue statutory appeal

Gujarat High Court13 Jul 2026

For revenue

Jai Ganesh Enterprise v. Union of India

Where State GST officer intercepted consignment in transit, found no quantity discrepancy but initiated penalty proceedings alleging reuse of documents, State GST officers were competent to act as proper officers under IGST Act where State Commissioner’s order designated them under State GST law; no separate Central notification was required. GST: Orders passed by State GST proper officers while exercising IGST powers were appealable before the State appellate authority by virtue of cross-empowerment; as an efficacious statutory remedy existed against confiscation and penalty orders, invocation of writ jurisdiction without exhausting appeal was impermissible

Rajasthan High Court10 Jul 2026

For assessee

Challengers Events (P.) Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan

Where assessee's appeal against Order-in-Original was time-barred solely because order was wrongly uploaded on GST portal under incorrect category, preventing timely knowledge and filing, and delay was not due to assessee's fault, denial of hearing would cause grave prejudice, hence delay was condoned and Appellate Authority was to entertain appeal and decide on merits

Gujarat High Court10 Jul 2026

For revenue

Mahalaxmi Industries v. Union of India

Where petitioner challenged order confirming fake ITC demand involving same SCN and identical modus operandi as connected entity, with both operating from same address and similar allegations, statutory appeal remedy was available, making writ jurisdiction not maintainable, and writ petition was rightly rejected in favour of statutory appellate process

Calcutta High Court9 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Shyam Traders v. State of West Bengal

Statutory appellate powers which permitted only confirmation, modification or annulment, where Appellate Authority, while dealing with ex parte order confirming tax, interest and penalty for alleged short- payment on outward supplies and availing excess ITC, directed parties to appear before Adjudicating Authority for further proceeding, such remand exceeded statutory appellate powers and Appellate Authority should decide issue within statutory limits. GST: Where despite express statutory prohibition, Appellate Authority remanded matter to Adjudicating Authority for allowing admissible ITC while rectification was rejected as time-barred without addressing jurisdictional defect, both orders were to be set aside; writ remedy was maintainable despite existence of alternative appellate remedy

Karnataka High Court9 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Sepl Infra (P.) Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)

Failure to upload an adjudication order in regular portal tab, coupled with non- service of full order and subsequent delayed knowledge, justified writ interference despite limitation; dismissal of statutory appeal was set aside, delay condoned and appeal restored for adjudication on merits, assessee having made statutory pre- deposit. GST: Coercive garnishee recovery during pendency of a statutory appeal, despite requisite pre-deposit, was unjustified; in view of appellate restoration, garnishee order was quashed, while dismissal of appeal as time-barred was set aside and delay condoned, with appeal restored for decision on merits

Every ruling, in plain sight.