GST CASE LAWS 18.06.2026
| Relevant Act | Section | Case Law Title | Brief Summary | Citation |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 8 | Friends Catering CBE, In re | Food supply for occasional events (with or without on-site service) is a naturally bundled composite supply and must be treated as a supply of service. | Click Here |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 9 | Friends Catering CBE, In re | Food supply at marriage/exhibition halls qualifies as outdoor catering (SAC 996334), taxable at 5% GST without ITC under Entry 7(iv); the taxpayer cannot opt for residual Entry 7(vi) at 18% with ITC. | Click Here |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 9 | Frutta Services (P.) Ltd., In re | Supply of food/beverages to corporates from third-party kitchens alongside menu planning and deployment of service staff falls under “other contract food services” (SAC 996337) and attracts 18% GST. | Click Here |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 171 | DG Anti Profiteering, DGAP v. Lifestyle International (P.) Ltd. | Omission of anti-profiteering rules and reassignment of functions (NAA to CCI to GSTAT) alters only the authority, not the statutory mandate; pending proceedings remain valid despite the lack of a savings clause. | Click Here |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 171 | DG Anti Profiteering, DGAP v. Lifestyle International (P.) Ltd. | Failure to reduce prices commensurately across all customers after a rate cut (28% to 18%) cannot be offset by cross-customer commercial arguments; unidentifiable profiteered amounts must go to consumer welfare funds. | Click Here |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 171 | DG Anti Profiteering, DGAP v. Lifestyle International (P.) Ltd. | No interest under Rule 133(3)(c) or penalty under Section 171(3A) can be imposed retrospectively for a profiteering period that occurred prior to the introduction of those provisions. | Click Here |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 171 | DG Anti Profiteering, DGAP v. Lifestyle International (P.) Ltd. | The 6-month timeline for the NAA to issue decisions under Rule 133(1) is directory and not mandatory; non-compliance does not lead to a breakdown or limitation bar on proceedings. | Click Here |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 171 | DG Anti Profiteering, DGAP v. Lifestyle International (P.) Ltd. | Expanding an inquiry to a PAN-India level under Rule 133(4) is legally valid when based on the respondent’s own admission of non-compliance; Rule 133(5) acts purely as a clarificatory provision. | Click Here |