GST CASE LAW 06.07.2026
| Relevant Act | Section | Case Law Title / Issuing Authority | Citation | Brief Summary |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | E-Way Bill Compliance | Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) | Click Here |
GSTN Advisory/FAQs: Clarifies the mandatory capture of “Ship-to GSTIN” in Bill-to/Ship-to transactions and voluntary closure of e-Way Bills. Explains API changes, system validations, and compliance aspects ahead of mandatory implementation from 01-08-2026. |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 73 (Demands & Recovery – Non-Fraud) | Sri Sri Granites v. Assistant Commissioner | Click Here | Issuing a single composite or consolidated Show Cause Notice (SCN) covering multiple financial years is legally impermissible. The composite SCN was quashed, giving the revenue liberty to issue fresh, year-wise notices. |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 74 (Demands & Recovery – Fraud/Suppression) | Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) | Click Here | Parallel initiation of audit-based and scrutiny-based proceedings for the same period following an NCLT-approved merger is valid since they arise from distinct processes. Writ petitions against such SCNs are not maintainable when facts show extended limitation under Section 74 is prima facie invocable. |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 74 (Demands & Recovery – Fraud/Suppression) | Sampoornam v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) / Commercial Tax Officer | Click Here | Where ex parte assessment orders for ITC mismatch and delayed GSTR-9 were issued in the name of a deceased individual because the legal heir failed to intimate the death, the orders were set aside and remitted for a fresh decision on merits subject to a pre-deposit. |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 74 (Demands & Recovery – Fraud/Suppression) | Tata Steel Ltd. v. Union of India | Click Here | Supreme Court Stay/Notice: Issued notice and granted a stay against a High Court order. Reaffirms that where an SCN is issued by a proper officer, replies are considered, and due process is followed without a patent breach of natural justice, the availability of an alternate statutory appellate remedy bars a writ petition. |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 75 (Demands & Recovery – General) | Sampoornam v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) / Commercial Tax Officer | Click Here | Adjudication under general demand frameworks remains legally maintainable for FY 2017-18 and 2019-20 because limitation periods stood validly extended by statutory notifications and the Supreme Court’s Covid-19 extension orders, even if extended-period parameters under Section 74 are found inapplicable. |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 93 (Liability in Special Cases – Death) | Sampoornam v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) / Commercial Tax Officer | Click Here | Upon the death of an assessee, the statutory liability for tax, interest, or penalty (such as ITC mismatches or late fees) transfers to the legal heir. The legal heir is bound to discharge these dues under GST law even if the underlying business has been discontinued. |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 132 (Offences and Prosecutions) | Tanveer Asharaf v. State of U.P. | Click Here |
1. Since the GST Act forms a complete special code for tax offenses, launching a prosecution under general penal law (BNS Section 316(5)) for delayed/non-deposit of GST/TDS without embezzlement or forgery is unsustainable.
2. For offenses occurring in FY 2017-18, prosecuting under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 is a legal infirmity. Substantive penal law in force at the time of the offense governs the action. FIR and chargesheet quashed. |
| Central GST Act, 2017 | Section 160 (Assessment Validity – No Signature) | Siri Constructions v. Assistant Commissionerst | Click Here | The physical or electronic signature of the Assessing Officer on an assessment summary in FORM GST DRC-07 is a mandatory legal requirement. The curative provisions of Section 160 cannot validate a completely unsigned order; hence, such an order must be set aside. |