IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 23.09.25 SECTION CASE LAW TITLE Brief Summary CITATION RELEVANT ACT Sec. 2, IGST Act IDP Education India (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India A company providing student placement services to its foreign parent isn’t an “intermediary” as it has no contract with the end service recipients (universities/students). Its services, therefore, qualify… Read More »
Court directs reply to SCN, linking cancellation to pending Section 74 proceedings. Issue What’s the appropriate legal remedy when tax authorities repeatedly issue show cause notices for the cancellation of a GST registration, even after previous cancellation orders have been consistently set aside? Facts The petitioner was subjected to a series of four show cause… Read More »
GST registration must be restored if portal access was denied for filing returns. Issue Can the cancellation of a GST registration for non-filing of returns be sustained when the taxpayer was effectively prevented from filing those returns because their access to the GST portal was blocked as a result of the registration being suspended or… Read More »
Unreasoned orders cancelling a GST registration without a hearing are legally invalid. Issue Is the cancellation of a GST registration legally sustainable if the entire process, from the initial show-cause notice to the final appellate order, is conducted without providing proper reasons and without giving the taxpayer a fair opportunity to be heard? Facts A… Read More »
A service isn’t an “intermediary” service without a three-party arrangement. Issue Can a company providing support services to its foreign parent company under a two-party agreement be classified as an “intermediary” under the IGST Act, 2017, thereby denying it the benefit of treating its services as an export? Facts The petitioner, an Indian subsidiary of… Read More »
A six-year time limit is reasonable for passing TDS default orders for non-residents. Issue In the absence of a specific statutory time limit in the Income-tax Act, 1961, what is the “reasonable period” within which an order can be passed under Section 201 to treat an assessee as being in default for failing to deduct… Read More »
An assessment order is time-barred if not proven to be issued before the deadline. Issue Is a search assessment order legally valid if the tax department cannot provide credible evidence to prove that the order was “issued”—meaning it physically left the control of the Assessing Officer—within the statutory time limit prescribed under Section 153B of… Read More »
A reassessment notice is invalid if issued beyond the calculated “surviving time” limit. Issue Is a reassessment notice for Assessment Year 2014-15 valid if it’s issued after the specific “surviving time” limit, which is calculated based on the TOLA scheme and the Supreme Court’s rulings in the cases of Ashish Agarwal and Rajeev Bansal? Facts… Read More »
An accountant’s error is a reasonable cause for condoning delay in filing Form 10-IC. Issue Can a delay in filing Form 10-IC to opt for the concessional tax rate under Section 115BAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, be condoned if the delay was caused by the inadvertence of the assessee’s accountant? Facts An assessee-company intended… Read More »
Cash deposits from business sales during demonetization are not unexplained without contrary evidence. Issue Can cash deposits made in a bank account during the demonetization period be automatically treated as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, especially for a business operating under a presumptive tax scheme? Facts The assessee, an individual… Read More »