IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 24.09.2025

Section	Case Law Title	Brief Summary	Citation	Relevant Act
Circular No. 252/09/2025 – GST	E-office generated ‘Issue Number’ will be deemed as DIN for communications by CBIC officers: Circular	The CBIC clarified that the eOffice system-generated ‘Issue Number’ for public communications will serve as the Document Identification Number (DIN), eliminating the need for a separate DIN. An online utility for verification has been introduced.	click here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (via CBIC Circular)
IMS Updates	GSTN introduced changes in IMS to keep specified records pending for one tax period	The GSTN has updated the Invoice Management System (IMS). Taxpayers can now keep specified records (like credit notes) pending for only one tax period and must declare the actual ITC availed. Changes are prospective from the October tax period.	click here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (via GSTN Advisory)
Grievance Redressal	Editorial Note: FAQs regarding GST Grievance Redressal on National Consumer Helpline	The government issued FAQs clarifying that taxpayers can raise GST queries/complaints (e.g., regarding non-receipt of GST rate change benefits) through the National Consumer Helpline (NCH) (1915 or WhatsApp 8800001915) or the INGRAM portal.	click here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 29	Bala Ji Medical Ajency v. State of U.P.	The Allahabad High Court set aside a show cause notice for cancellation of registration because it scheduled the personal hearing before the full 30-day period given for the assessee to reply had expired, thus violating the due process of law.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 54	R.B. Construction v. State of West Bengal	The Calcutta High Court held that the issue of a writ petitioner’s entitlement to a GST refund should first be decided by the respondent authority itself, as the petitioner’s representation on the claim was still pending.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 73	Khokan Motors Works (P.) Ltd. v. Senior Joint Commissioner of State Tax	The Calcutta High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, ruling that the demand notice and subsequent orders were bad in law and could not be sustained because the materials used to allege tax evasion were never made available to the assessee.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 75	Jsw Steel Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise	The Karnataka High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter because the order was passed based on statements of a third party, and the assessee was not provided an opportunity to cross-examine the third party’s representatives, violating natural justice.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 75	Jay Jalaram Mandap Decorators v. Deputy Commissioner	The Gujarat High Court set aside the impugned order, finding it to be a non-speaking order and a breach of natural justice because it was passed without granting an adjournment, despite the assessee’s proprietor being undergoing medical treatment.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 130	Petroliv Petroleums (Angels Group) v. State of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram	The Kerala High Court dismissed the writ petition regarding a penalty for confiscation of goods/vehicle. The court held that the Navy’s debit of the petitioner’s dues to pay the penalty was a contractual matter, and since the payment was for a statutory penalty, the petitioner’s only remedy for a refund was a successful appeal.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

For More :- Read IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 23.09.25