| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 54 |
Alstom Transport India Ltd. v. Union of India |
Omission of Rules 89(4B) and 96(10) without a saving clause rendered all pending SCNs and orders under those rules lapsed ab initio, warranting the quashing of the adjudication order in line with JJ Plastalloy. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 73 |
J M D News & Advertisers v. State of Uttarakhand |
Passing an order without considering a manually submitted reply violates principles of natural justice. Technical objections regarding non-electronic filing do not justify ignoring a timely response. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 74 |
Roshan Sharma v. Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax |
Petitioner directed to pursue a statutory appeal regarding Fastag/transit data and cross-examination issues; Appellate Authority instructed to decide on merits without limitation objections due to technical glitches. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 75 |
Ved Enterprises v. State of U.P. |
Marking personal hearing as ‘NA’ and passing an adverse order violates the mandatory oral hearing mandate under Section 75(4). Failure to file a written reply does not forfeit the right to an oral hearing. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 83 |
Veerapandi v. Union of India |
Continued provisional attachment of a bank account beyond the strict one-year limit under Section 83(2) is impermissible and liable to be set aside. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 107 |
New Kabady Shop v. State of Taxes Department |
Extraordinary writ jurisdiction invoked under Article 226 to condone a 1-day delay beyond the statutory condonable period due to a close relative’s death to prevent gross injustice. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 112 |
Prafulla Kumar Mohanty v. Additional Commissioner, CT & GST (Appeal) |
Once GSTAT is constituted and operational with extended deadlines, writ remedies against Section 74 orders are unavailable; assessees must exhaust the statutory appeal route under Section 112. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 132 |
Dhruv Seth v. Union of India |
Bail granted to a director accused of tax evasion where investigation was complete, co-accused stated limited role in incorporation only, and there was no risk of tampering with evidence. |
Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 |
Section 168 |
Lovelesh Singhal v. Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs |
[SLP Dismissed] Challenge to Circular No. 3/3/2017-GST and Section 70 summons failed; assignment of functions by the Board held valid, requiring the assessee to comply with summons. |
Click Here |
