Skip to content

Case Laws
Insights
Topics
Tools
About

Case-law directory

Every ruling, in plain sight.

Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.

Simplifying tax. Empowering you.

Clear, searchable summaries of Indian tax rulings — and a professional community to discuss what each decision means in practice.

Explore

Case laws
Insights
Topics
Courts

Tools

Income tax calculator
SIP calculator
EMI calculator
GST calculator
All calculators

Company

About
Contact

Legal

Privacy policy
Terms of use
Disclaimer

Summaries on TaxKatha are for general information only and do not constitute legal or tax advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on any ruling.

© 2026 TaxKatha. All rights reserved.

Case Laws
Insights
Topics
Tools
About

Search case laws

/

Forum

Supreme Court24 High Courts537 GSTAT89 Advance rulings19

Court or bench

Outcome

In favour of assessee457 In favour of revenue176 Partly allowed0 Matter remanded126

Topic

Demands & adjudication150 Appeals to Appellate Authority69 Input tax credit68 Registration58 Penalty & confiscation33 Refund33 Service of notices & orders

Provision

CGST S.73
CGST S.74
CGST S.107
CGST S.75
CGST S.16
CGST S.169
CGST S.29
CGST S.54
CGST S.9
CGST S.30

More provisions

Decision date

FromTo

59 rulings found

Sort by

High CourtsRemove filter
Appeals to Appellate AuthorityRemove filter
Clear all

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

30

Appeals to Appellate Tribunal22

Anti-profiteering20

Arrest & bail16

Interest & waiver14

Levy & collection14

Recovery & attachment14

Supply & valuation14

Detention in transit12

Government contractors11

Offences & prosecution11

Classification & rate9

Officers & jurisdiction7

Search & seizure7

Transitional provisions5

Advance ruling3

Writs & constitutional remedies3

CGST S.107
CGST S.74
CGST S.75
Constitution Art.226

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

CGST S.107
CGST S.50
CGST S.73
CGST S.112
+1

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

CGST S.107
CGST S.169

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

CGST S.107
CGST S.74

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

CGST S.107
CGST S.161

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

CGST S.107
CGST S.79
CGST S.78

Himachal Pradesh High Court8 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Friends Alloys v. Union of India

Where petitioner challenged order-in-original and GST DRC-07 summary by writ petition despite statutory remedy of appeal under section 107, petitioner was required to pursue appellate remedy and period spent in writ was to be excluded from limitation, allowing appeal to be filed within thirty days

CGST S.107
CGST S.74

Rajasthan High Court7 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Infinite Ev Solutions v. Deputy Commissioner

Where petitioner's GST registration was cancelled and statutory appeal was filed with delay of 167 days due to bona fide, uncontrollable reasons including business closure and fraud-tag impacting livelihood, and Appellate Authority otherwise lacked jurisdiction to condone such delay, non-adjudication would cause grave prejudice so delay was condoned and appeal was directed to be entertained on merits

CGST S.107
CGST S.29

Andhra Pradesh High Court3 Jul 2026

For assessee

Usha Enterprises v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Where due to proprietor's hospitalization, appeal was filed with 17 days delay beyond period 30 days prescribed under Act and authority rejected admission without examining sufficient cause or conducting an independent inquiry, delay was to be condoned considering that appeal is a valuable statutory right

CGST S.107

Karnataka High Court22 Jun 2026

For assessee

Aditya Security Force v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (AUDIT 2)

Where ex parte GST orders were passed and assessee raised arguable issues on reverse charge liability and demand exceeding stated in show cause notice, in peculiar facts of case belated statutory appeals was to be allowed for adjudication on merits

CGST S.107
CGST S.73

Karnataka High Court19 Jun 2026

For assessee

Appanna Rangappa Roogi v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Where petitioner partnership firm's statutory appeal against SCN adjudication was dismissed as time-barred on computed period of delay from date on which order was wrongly uploaded on portal, since precedents permitted interference despite absence of statutory power to condone further delay, dismissal of appeal in instant case was unsustainable; delay was to be condoned, and appeal was to be directed to be adjudicated on merits

CGST S.107

Telangana High Court18 Jun 2026

Ravi Kunchepu v. State Tax Officer (FAC)

Where taxpayer filed writ challenging order under section 73 claiming knowledge only upon order's upload in 'additional notices' of portal, and statutory appeal under section 107 was available, writ jurisdiction was not exercised, liberty granted for appeal with delay condonation and pre- deposit, and appellate authority directed to consider condonation and decide merits if satisfied

CGST S.107
CGST S.73

Telangana High Court15 Jun 2026

For assesseeRemanded

K. Malaxmi Infra Ventures (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Appellate Joint Commissioner of State Tax

Where petitioner filed appeal against order-in-original with delay and omitted to disclose pending rectification application due to Chartered Accountant error, omission deprived petitioner of a material ground for delay condonation, thus order dismissing appeal as time-barred was to be set aside and matter was to be remitted to appellate authority for fresh consideration of condonation application and if satisfaction, decide appeal on merits

CGST S.107
CGST S.161

Calcutta High Court11 Jun 2026

For assessee

GSPR Developers (P.) Ltd. v. State of West Bengal

Where adjudication order was not communicated to petitioner but only to its accountant who failed to relay information, leading to appeal delay until recovery action, dismissal of appeal as time-barred was unjustified since sufficient cause existed and mandatory pre-deposit was paid, warranting condonation of delay and admission of appeal for substantive appellate remedy. GST: Where petitioner learned of recovery only after bank accounts were frozen and payment of mandatory pre-deposit was made before filing appeal, interference was warranted to secure justice as recovery during pendency of appeal after pre-deposit violated statutory scheme, thus delay in filing appeal deserved condonation though garnishee freeze was ordered to continue till disposal of appeal

CGST S.107
CGST S.79

Telangana High Court10 Jun 2026

For assesseeRemanded

One E Store (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (State Taxes)

Where assessee filed rectification application against original order within limitation, appeal was filed within three months of rectification rejection, and all statutory remedies were diligently pursued, dismissal of appeal as time- barred due to technical defects in memo was unjustified, and pragmatic approach called for remand for decision on merits

CGST S.107
CGST S.161

Telangana High Court9 Jun 2026

For revenue

Gayathri Enterprises v. Joint Commissioner, Appeals-II

Where petitioner challenged IGST demand on export supplies under Notification 41/2017-IGST (Rate) alleging violation of natural justice and non-consideration of documents, since appellate authority duly considered materials but found insufficient invoice-wise correlation, and no breach of natural justice, jurisdictional error, or mala fides was established, writ remedy could not be entertained and statutory appeal before GSTAT was proper course

CGST S.107
CGST S.112
Constitution Art.226

Orissa High Court5 Jun 2026

Mahesh Value Products (P.) Ltd. v. Chief Commissioner of CT & GST

Where appellate authority rejected appeal as time barred by incorrectly computing limitation period under section 107 despite appeal being filed within condonable period, such rejection was unsustainable and matter was liable to be remanded for consideration of delay condonation request

CGST S.107

Meghalaya High Court2 Jun 2026

For revenue

Jorabat Shillong Expressway Ltd. v. Union of India

Where BOT (Annuity) road construction concessionaire challenged SCN and OIO alleging that GST demand on annuity post launch commercial operation of project and sought writ on grounds including jurisdiction and constitutional invalidity, since core disputes related to classification, exemption and composite supply, determination of which required determination of mixed question of facts and law and no grave jurisdictional or natural justice breaches were shown, writ petition was not maintainable and statutory appeal would be an efficacious alternate remedy. GST: Where petitioner, executing BOT (Annuity) Jorabat–Shillong NH-40 project, challenged DGGI and CGST officers’ jurisdiction to issue and adjudicate demand for GST on annuity, both Additional Director-DGGI and Additional Commissioner of CGST-Shillong were Proper Officers appointed and empowered under relevant notifications and statute to act under Sections 73 and 74; so jurisdictional challenge to their actions would fail

CGST S.107
CGST S.9
Constitution Art.226
CGST S.74
+2

Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court2 Jun 2026

For assesseeRemanded

New Kabady Shop v. State of Texes Department of Th. Its Commissioner

Where assessee filed appeal with one-day delay beyond condonable period due to sister's death and Appellate Authority rejected it as time- barred, though statute restricts condonation to one month, extraordinary writ power can remedy gross injustice, so delay was condoned, rejection order set aside and appeal restored for decision on merits to avoid harshness

CGST S.107
Constitution Art.226

1
2
3

Page 3 of 3