IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 04.01.2026
| Relevant Act | Section / Notification | Case Law Title / Notification | Brief Summary | Citation |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 11 (Exemption) | Goldie Ashokbhai Shah, In re | [AAR Ruling] Exemption for renting residential dwelling (Entry 12) is not applicable where a commercial building owner leases it to an unregistered company, which then uses it to provide accommodation to students/professionals. The direct nature of “residential use” is broken. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 54 (Refund) | Meghaaaarika Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. State of Gujarat | Assignment/transfer of leasehold rights of a plot allotted by GIDC (for consideration) is not subject to GST. It is treated akin to sale of land. Amount deposited under protest must be refunded. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 67 (Seizure) | Puspa Furniture (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India | Seizure of Cash: Money is excluded from the definition of “goods.” GST law allows seizure of cash only if the department can link it to a specific taxable transaction. General seizure of cash found during search is impermissible. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 69 (Arrest) | Manmohan Singh v. State (DGGI), Chandigarh | Bail granted in an ITC offence case. Since the investigation was complete, the accused had spent 6 months in custody, was suffering from ailments, and the offence is triable by a Magistrate (max 5 years), continued detention was unjustified. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 73 (Demand) | Palani Ilanthirayan v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer | Order imposing a general penalty for late filing of returns was upheld as it did not impose the specific “late fee” under Section 47 (which is automatic), but rather penalized the non-compliance generally. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 74 (Fraud) | Raghuvansh Agro Farms Ltd. v. State of U.P. | Jurisdiction & Evidence: Order under Section 74 was quashed as it was passed by a State authority lacking jurisdiction, without a personal hearing. Allegations of “circular trading” were unsustainable against valid banking/e-way bill records. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 75 (General Demand) | S.S. Enterprises v. State of U.P. | Order set aside as the demand for tax, interest, and penalty was in excess of the amount specified in the Show Cause Notice (SCN), violating the express provisions of Section 75(7). | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 83 / Rule 86A | NB International v. Commissioner, CGST | Re-blocking of ITC on the same facts (non-existent supplier) after the expiry of one year is impermissible. Rule 86A(3) and Section 83(2) restrict provisional attachment/blocking to a maximum of one year. | Click Here |
For More :- IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 03.01.2026