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 & orders30

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

457 rulings found

Sort by

In favour of assesseeRemove filter
Clear all

Kerala High Court28 Jul 2026
For assessee
Choice Color Coats v. Deputy Director Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence
Where respondents issued a single composite show cause notice and summary covering multiple financial years, such composite notice was impermissible warranting quashing of consolidated notice and summary, with liberty to issue separate notices for each relevant year and exclusion of limitation period for reinitiation from issuance of composite notice till receipt of judgment copy

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.75
CGST S.73
CGST S.74

Kerala High Court28 Jul 2026

For assessee

Marycom v. State of Kerala

Where petitioner contractor executed balance work awarded after GST introduction pursuant to earlier pre-GST tender and BoQ excluded taxes, GST incidence arose post-award and lay outside quoted rates, thus reliance on inclusive rate clause was unwarranted and petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of GST actually paid, subject to proof by GST returns

CGST S.9
CGST S.142

Kerala High Court28 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Wild Planet Pvt. Ltd. v. Superintendent, Central Tax & Central Excise

Returns for January to March 2020 filed on 25-12-2020 and 29-12-2020 were within cut-off prescribed under retrospective Section 16(5) of CGST Act; hence, petitioner was entitled to ITC notwithstanding expiry of CBIC circular’s rectification window regarding GST demand orders relating to Section 16(4) time-barred ITC

CGST S.16

Delhi High Court28 Jul 2026

For assessee

Commissioner of Central Tax, CGST, Delhi East v. Samiah International Builder (P.) Ltd

Where CESTAT determined taxability of service and appeal was filed under section 35G, since precedent establishes that such appeals lie to Supreme Court under section 35L, and appellant cited no contrary statutory provision or binding precedent, appeal before High Court was not maintainable and appellant was relegated to remedy before Supreme Court

Central Excise S.35L
Central Excise S.35G

Gujarat High Court28 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Aarya Metals v. State of Gujarat

Where ITC recovery was ordered against petitioners based on allegations of non-genuine inward supplies without addressing their detailed replies and documents and without granting an opportunity for personal hearing, passing a cryptic two-line order without reasons violated natural justice requirements, rendering the order unsustainable and necessitating its quashing for decision after proper hearing. GST: Where proceedings for recovery of ITC with interest were initiated without intimating date, time or venue for personal hearing even after reminders, and a cryptic order lacking reasons was passed, failure to provide statutory personal hearing before adverse decision amounted to breach of natural justice, thus vitiating adjudication and rendering impugned order liable to be quashed

CGST S.75

Gujarat High Court28 Jul 2026

For assessee

Shahedabegum Irshadahmed Chaudhary v. State of Gujarat

Where department issued show cause notice and demand order for alleged fraud against a deceased taxpayer after GSTIN cancellation with nil demand, and petitioner, a housewife unrelated to business, presented death certificate, both SCN and demand order were quashed as issued against deceased, with liberty to proceed per law against petitioner if necessary

CGST S.74
CGST S.93

Punjab & Haryana High Court28 Jul 2026

For assessee

J K Cement Works v. Commissioner CGST

Where petitioner company engaged in cement manufacturing was granted refund by order in 2022 but Revenue withheld release pending an appeal filed belatedly before Tribunal which remained unlisted, and petitioner could not be regarded as a fly-by-night operator, release of refund was directed subject to petitioner furnishing undertaking to redeposit if departmental appeal ultimately succeeded

CGST S.54
CGST S.119

Madras High Court28 Jul 2026

For assessee

Incompressible Fluid Control System v. Assistant Commissioner

Waiver of interest or penalty under section 128A was available where proceedings had been initiated under section 73 even in respect of self assessed tax arising from belated filing of GSTR 3B, non obstante clause in section 75(12) permitting direct recovery under section 79 could not exclude such cases from amnesty scheme once liability was determined under section 73 GST: Waiver of interest or penalty under section 128A having been accepted and Form GST SPL 05 issued, authorities could not subsequently declare such approval void by invoking section 161 except in contingencies specifically contemplated under Rule 164(16) or 164(17) GST: Waiver of interest or penalty under section 128A being governed by mandatory timelines under Rule 164, belated filing of application or payment beyond prescribed period could not be condoned on basis of substantial compliance, and rejection of waiver claim was justified GST: Waiver of interest or penalty under section 128A being subject to mandatory filing timelines under Rule 164, belated or non filing of application on plea of lack of knowledge of section 73 order could not be condoned, and writ petitions were liable to be dismissed

CGST S.128A
CGST S.73
CGST S.75
CGST S.79
+3

GSTAT Hyderabad28 Jul 2026

For assessee

Reddy Veeranna Constructions (P.) Ltd v. Appeal I Commissioner

Where penalty was imposed for alleged fake invoicing without supply and all proceedings including show cause notice, order-in-original and appellate order arose prior to 01.10.2025, no pre-deposit was required for appeal before GSTAT as proviso mandating pre-deposit for penalty-only appeals came into effect prospectively from 01.10.2025 via Finance Act, 2025

CGST S.112
CGST S.107

Punjab & Haryana High Court27 Jul 2026

For assessee

Gugal Electrical and Engg. Works v. State of Punjab

Where GST show cause notice and order-in-original were served only by upload on GST portal without acknowledgment or reply, such service was not valid under Section 169 read with Section 146, appeals dismissed as time barred were restored and portal-only upload did not trigger limitation, retrospective amendment had no effect as Rules did not permit such service

CGST S.169
CGST S.146

Madras High Court27 Jul 2026

For assessee

Tvl. SVJ Holdings v. Additional Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise

Where SCN underlying assessment and penalty proceedings was issued by DGGI and adjudication was carried out by officer not listed in Table 5 of Notification No. 2/2022-Central Tax, there was prima facie lack of jurisdiction, making out a case for interim stay of impugned orders

CGST S.5
CGST S.3
CGST S.4

AAR Tamil Nadu27 Jul 2026

For assessee

Gokulram Shanmugam Kantharajan, In re

Where services of upkeeping and maintenance of residential TNUHDB housing units comprise sweeping, cleaning, collection, segregation and storage of household waste, such activities are classifiable as waste collection services for residential areas under SAC 999423 rather than residual Heading 9997 GST: Where GCC contract primarily involves cleaning and garbage removal services and welfare kits and consumables are procured by applicant for its own safety and operational requirements without any supply of goods to GCC, condition of composite supply under Entry 3A is not satisfied and exemption from GST is not available

CGST S.11
CGST S.8

Punjab & Haryana High Court27 Jul 2026

For assessee

United Chem India v. Excise and Taxation Officer

Where notice and order-in-original were served only by uploading on GST portal without acknowledgment or reply, such electronic uploading was insufficient service under section 169, ex parte proceedings were to be restored to SCN stage for reply, and limitation for appeal was not triggered by such service

CGST S.169
CGST S.146

Tripura High Court27 Jul 2026

For assessee

Ashutosh Bandyopadhay v. Union of India

Where assessee reported invoices under incorrect GSTIN in GSTR-1 due to bona fide error, while taxes were duly paid and there was no loss of revenue, statutory provisions permitting rectification of inadvertent errors in GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B were applicable despite portal constraints, authorities were accordingly directed to permit amendment or manual correction to remedy error

CGST S.39
CGST S.16
CGST S.37

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

CGST S.107
CGST Rules R.108

Calcutta High Court24 Jul 2026

For assessee

Ratul Talukdar v. Union of India

Where ownership of seized perishable goods was not established, claimant could not seek release as owner but may seek release under alternate statutory mechanism; compelling claimant to participate in auction was unsustainable

CGST S.129
CGST Rules R.144A

Calcutta High Court24 Jul 2026

For assessee

Subhendu Dutta v. Union of India

Where registration was cancelled solely for non-filing of returns for six consecutive months and delay in seeking writ was explained, cancellation was to be set aside on condition that petitioner files all pending returns and pays due tax, interest, fine, penalty and late fees within six weeks

CGST S.29
CGST S.30

Allahabad High Court24 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Sampark Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax

Where Tribunal did not notify next hearing date by uploaded judicial order after adjournment but proceeded ex parte without issuing fresh notice, and weekly cause list or administrative orders could not substitute statutory notice requirements under Rule 18, ex parte order was passed without due opportunity and was accordingly set aside with matter remanded

Rajasthan High Court23 Jul 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Navin Tent House v. State of Rajasthan

Where SCN proposing tax demand expressly contemplated personal hearing after reply due date and assessee filed timely reply with written personal hearing request, but officer passed ex parte order without fixing such hearing or considering reply, denial of opportunity breached natural justice and vitiated assessment, mandating setting aside of order and directing fresh proceeding after affording personal hearing

CGST S.75
CGST S.74
CGST Rules R.142

Karnataka High Court23 Jul 2026

For assessee

Padmavati Engineerings v. State of Karnataka Department of Finance

Where assessee was unaware of any tax demand leading to attachment of bank account without prior hearing, such recovery action was prima facie unsustainable as opportunity of hearing is a mandatory procedural requirement; so communication effecting attachment was to be kept in abeyance and attachment could not operate until hearing requirement was complied with

CGST S.79
CGST S.75
CGST Rules R.142

1
…
12
13
14
…
23

Page 13 of 23