IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 25.02.2026

Relevant Section	Case Law Title	Core Ruling & Strategic Summary	Citation
Section 16	Malaya Rub-Tech Industries v. UOI	[Bona Fide Buyer] ITC cannot be denied to a buyer solely because the supplier failed to pay tax, unless the Revenue proves collusion, fraud, or non-bona fide intent on the buyer’s part.	Click Here
Section 169	V.S. Muruganandam v. Deputy STO	[Ineffective Service] Serving notices only via portal is insufficient if the taxpayer doesn’t respond. Officers should explore alternative modes like RPAD (Post) to ensure natural justice before passing ex-parte orders.	Click Here
Section 107 / 112	Ashirwad Food Industries v. UOI	[No Double Pre-deposit] If a taxpayer has already deposited the 10% pre-deposit at the First Appellate stage, no further pre-deposit is required to move the Tribunal (GSTAT) against that order.	Click Here
Section 29	Bhagvan Singh v. Comm. of DGST	[Retrospective Ban] Registration cannot be cancelled retrospectively unless specific reasons for such backdating are recorded in both the SCN and the final order.	Click Here
Section 171	DGAP v. Shrivision Towers	[Home Buyer ITC] Anti-profiteering benefits apply only to buyers who transitioned from pre-GST to post-GST. If a flat is booked entirely in the post-GST period, no “ITC benefit” is deemed to be passed on.	Click Here
Section 69	Mukul Mittal v. RPO	[Passport Rights] Pendency of a GST prosecution is not an absolute bar to passport renewal. If the Trial Court grants permission, the Passport Office must renew the document.	Click Here

For More :- Read IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 24.02.2026