| Section 10 |
Sri Parameshwara Bricks v. State Tax Officer |
When a brick manufacturer’s aggregate turnover exceeded the composition threshold (after correcting typographical errors), the composition option ceased from that exact date. Regular tax liability applied only to subsequent supplies, with credit allowed for composition tax already paid. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 15 |
Sri Parameshwara Bricks v. State Tax Officer |
Invoices issued under composition scheme reflect total consideration inclusive of tax per Section 10(4). On subsequent assessment at regular rates, differential tax, interest, and penalty must be computed on a cum-tax basis under Rule 35, even if not specifically claimed by the assessee. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 16 |
Mobile City Communication v. State Tax Officer |
Denial of ITC under Section 16(4) for Jan–Mar 2019 returns filed on 31.10.2019 was set aside; the petitioner was eligible for relief under Section 16(5) as returns were filed within the extended cut-off date of 30.11.2021. Matter remitted for reconsideration under Section 16(5). |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 69 |
Abdul Majid v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes |
Anticipatory bail granted to scrap-trading firm proprietors facing allegations of bogus ITC due to subsequent cancellation of suppliers’ registrations. Purchases were backed by invoices, bank payments, and GST returns, with no prima facie proof of fraud or need for custodial interrogation. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 107 |
Kalu Ram v. State of Rajasthan |
Inordinate delay in filing a statutory appeal was condoned under writ jurisdiction because the order was solely uploaded to the GST portal (petitioner learned of it via bank attachment). Matter remitted for hearing on merits subject to statutory pre-deposit. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 107 |
Green Woods v. Union of India |
Procedural defects in pre-deposit requirements are curable. Dismissal of an appeal for initial pre-deposit shortfall was set aside because the petitioner had already deposited substantial funds during investigation and cured the deficit prior to the passing of the appellate order. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 122 |
Marginmart Infosystems (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner CGST |
Writ petition challenging penalty proceedings for alleged non-existent recipient supplies and fake ITC was dismissed on the grounds of alternative efficacious remedy under Section 107, leaving all jurisdictional and procedural grounds open before the Appellate Authority. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
| Section 169 |
A 1 Enterprises v. Sales Tax Officer Class II / AVATO |
Merely uploading an SCN and order onto the GST portal without proof of actual intimation, delivery, or acknowledgment is insufficient service where no reply was filed. The assessment order was set aside with liberty granted to file a reply to the SCN. |
Click Here |
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
