IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 30.12.2025
| Relevant Act | Section | Case Law Title | Brief Summary | Citation |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 29 (Cancellation) | MS Imagine Marketing Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner CGST Appeals II Delhi | Cancellation order was quashed as the officer failed to consider the petitioner’s reply, which included relevant rent agreements and returns for the last three months. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 54 (Refund) | ITD Cemindia JV v. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals )-5 | Refund of unutilized ITC (inverted duty structure) was wrongly denied despite binding precedents in the assessee’s own case. Respondents were directed to grant the refund with applicable interest. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 70 (Summons) | Md. Aniqul Islam v. Directorate of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence | Issuance of summons for information-gathering does not constitute the commencement of proceedings. Writ petitions challenging such search/summons actions at this stage were held to be premature. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 83 (Provisional Attachment) | Aashish v. Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) HQRS. | Writ against freezing of bank account was refused due to suppression of material facts (ongoing DGGI investigation, non-existent premises). The petitioner was relegated to the alternate statutory remedy (filing objections under Rule 159). | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 93 (Death of Proprietor) | Sambul Shahid v. State of U.P. | Demand order and notice issued in the name of a deceased proprietor (who died before proceedings began) without notice to the legal representative were held unsustainable and void. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 107 (Appeals) | Mukund Enterprises v. State of U.P. | An appeal cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution once the merits have been examined. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 129 (Detention) | Rc Sales and Services v. State of Uttar Pradesh | Detention of goods merely due to a PIN code error in the ‘ship to’ address was held unsustainable, as CBIC Circular No. 64/38/2018-GST clarifies that no action is warranted under Section 129 for such minor errors when other documents are valid. | Click Here |
For More :- Read IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 29.12.2025