IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 19.12.2025
| Relevant Act | Section | Case Law Title / Advisory | Brief Summary | Citation / Source |
| CGST / IGST Act | GSTR-9/9C Advisory | GSTN Consolidated FAQs for FY 2024-25 | GSTN released a consolidated FAQ for filing Annual Returns (GSTR-9) and Reconciliation Statements (GSTR-9C) for FY 2024-25. It clarifies ITC reporting, RCM, table-wise disclosures, and the impact of the new Invoice Management System (IMS). | GSTN Advisory (Oct/Dec 2025) |
| Integrated GST Act, 2017 | Section 16 (Zero Rated Supply) | Infodesk India (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India | An Indian subsidiary providing software advisory and technical services exclusively to its US parent company is considered an independent service provider (not an agent). Refund of unutilized ITC on zero-rated supplies is allowable as the services qualify as exports. | Click Here |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 54 / Rule 96(10) | JJ Plastalloy (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India | [Landmark Ruling] The omission of Rule 96(10) (which restricted IGST refunds for Advance Authorization holders) via Notification 20/2024 is treated as a repeal without a saving clause. Consequently, all pending refund rejections/SCNs under this rule are quashed. | Click Here |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 69 (Power to Arrest) | Lokesh @ Lokesh Hasija v. Union of India | Bail granted to a Chartered Accountant accused in a Rs. 40 Crore ITC fraud. Bail was justified as the case is based on documentary evidence, the applicant was already in jail for two months, and the trial is expected to be prolonged. | Click Here |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 107 (Appeals) | Laxmi Metal and Machines v. Union of India | In computing the limitation period for filing an appeal, the day of communication of the order is “Day Zero” (excluded). An appeal filed within the extended period calculated this way is maintainable. | Click Here |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 107 (Appeals) | Aman Sanitation v. Principal Commissioner, CGST | Writ petition against a demand order was dismissed. Since the petitioner was aware of the notices and had filed a reply, no breach of natural justice occurred. The petitioner must follow the statutory appellate route including the pre-deposit requirement. | Click Here |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 129 (Detention) | Hysum Steel v. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes | Detention of goods for a change of route is unsustainable unless the department proves the assessee deliberately instructed the driver to deviate to evade tax. Only a general penalty under 125 may be applicable, not the heavy penalty under 129 | Click Here |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 140 (Transitional ITC) | Clyde Pumps (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India | Substantive transitional credit (TRAN-1) cannot be denied due to technical glitches on the GST portal. ISD units with pre-GST Cenvat credit are entitled to have this credit reflected in their ECL for onward distribution. | Click Here |
For More :- Read :- IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 18.11.2025