| Section 16 |
Peekay Industries v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes |
GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A mismatches alone cannot be treated as conclusive proof of wrongful ITC availment without enquiring into suppliers or examining reconciliations, and circular verification requirements cannot be applied retrospectively outside their specified periods. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 30 |
Dhingra Glass v. Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax |
When a GST registration cancellation appeal is dismissed solely on limitation grounds and the assessee expresses readiness to clear all dues and file pending returns, liberty to apply for revocation should be permitted. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 61 |
Peekay Industries v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes |
Final ITC demands confirmed under CGST and SGST heads using separate unverified workings without explaining the abandonment of primary IGST reconciliations are legally unsustainable. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 73 |
Peekay Industries v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes |
Confirming demand under CGST and SGST despite replies and reconciliations being confined to IGST—without giving proper opportunity to contest or resolving inconsistencies—is unsustainable. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 73 |
Benny Augustine v. State Tax Officer |
Composite or consolidated show-cause notices covering multiple financial years for tax or ITC demands not involving fraud are invalid as distinct periods cannot be clubbed together. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 79 |
BVG India Ltd. v. Union of India |
Garnishee proceedings and recovery notices for interest on delayed payments cannot proceed while the petitioner’s representations disputing liability and computation remain pending and undecided. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 107 |
Innotex (India) (P.) Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan |
Writ petitions challenging orders where statutory appellate remedies exist will not be entertained simply due to rectification rejections, and assessees must pursue the appeal mechanism. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 112 |
City Lights and Equipments v. State of Meghalaya |
Disputes involving complex factual evaluations, proper officer jurisdiction, and reliance on seized records must be adjudicated by the GSTAT rather than through writ petitions. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
