GST CASE LAWS 12.11.2026

Section	Case Law Title	Brief Summary	Citation	Relevant Act
Section 16	MPS Steels v. Commissioner of CGST & CE, Kochi	Confirming an ITC demand under Section 16(2)(c) when the show-cause notice only alleged contravention of Section 16(2)(aa) goes beyond the scope of the notice and is impermissible; the demand, interest, and penalty were set aside.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 29	BPJ Construction LLP v. Himanshu Verma	Cancelling GST registration based on a vague show-cause notice lacking supplier details, GSTINs, and specific grounds—and relying on new materials at the appellate stage—violates natural justice, rendering both orders unsustainable.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 54	Propix Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of State Tax, Maharashtra	Refund on deemed export supplies to an EOU was admissible with Section 56 interest because Form A, Form B, and non-claim declarations were properly submitted, clubbing tax periods across multiple financial years is permitted, and the claim filed on 08.01.2025 for Dec 2023–May 2024 supplies fell within the two-year limitation period.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 107	Shailendra Kumar Singh v. Mansi Udhyog	Where the first appellate authority set aside both penalty and fine under Sections 122 and 130(2), Revenue’s second appeal challenging only the fine without assailing the penalty finding was not maintainable and was dismissed summarily.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 113	DGAP, Director General of Anti-profiteering v. Bengal Shapoorji Housing Development (P.) Ltd.	Rectification jurisdiction under Rule 31 is restricted to apparent clerical or factual errors and cannot be used to review merits, rely on subsequent decisions, or exclude the GST component from profiteered amounts already directed to be refunded.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 129	Shaily Singh v. Prabhu Aastha Enterprise (P.) Ltd.	Detaining goods and imposing a penalty for non-filing of Part-B of an e-way bill during a short intra-State feeder movement (within the 50 km exemption) was unjustified where invoices and Part-A were intact and no tax evasion existed.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 129	Shyam Vir Singh v. A.A Enterprises	Penalty imposed on goods accompanied by a valid invoice and live e-way bill solely on the basis of a driver’s uncorroborated roadside statement regarding loading from an unregistered site—without independent field inquiry or intent to evade—was unsustainable.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 130	Vishal Singh v. Poorvi Enterprises	Mere excess stock quantified via visual estimation cannot justify confiscation and penalty under Section 130 in the absence of evidence of manipulation, unaccounted manufacture, or intent to evade tax; such discrepancies must be addressed under regular demand provisions.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 140	Devasurya Traders v. Commissioner of Kerala State GST	Transitional credit on a pre-GST truck chassis disclosed in VAT returns could not be denied merely for non-filing of specific VAT forms prior to commercial use, whereas transitional KVAT credit claimed without any carry-forward balance in the June 2017 VAT return was rightly denied.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 169	Ramprastha Promoters & Developers (P.) Ltd. v. State of Haryana	Writ petition challenging the validity of serving notices and orders via the ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ tab on the GST portal was disposed of in terms of the settled precedent in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section 171	DGAP, Director General of Anti-profiteering v. Bengal Shapoorji Housing Development (P.) Ltd.	Profiteered amounts must be refunded directly to homebuyers whose bank details are available, while deposits into Central and State Consumer Welfare Funds (in equal shares under Rule 133(3)(c)) are permitted only after proving bona fide efforts to trace remaining allottees.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017