GST CASE LAWS 24.06.2-26
| Relevant Act | Section | Case Law Title | Citation | Brief Summary |
| Rajasthan GST Act, 2017 / CGST Act, 2017 | Tariff Classification | SGS Packaging (P.) Ltd., In re |
2026
|
Non-biodegradable paper bags do not qualify for concessional 5% GST under Entry 319 or 322. They fall under Heading 4819 and attract 18% GST under Entry 185 of Schedule II. |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 7 | Wika Instruments India (P.) Ltd., In re |
2026
|
When an employer arranges transportation and canteen services via third parties and recovers nominal amounts from employees, the employer is the supplier. The transaction qualifies as a “supply” under Sec 7(1). |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 11 | Wika Instruments India (P.) Ltd., In re |
2026
|
Transport facilities provided to employees via non-AC buses where charges are recovered are not exempt under Entry 15(b) of Notification No. 12/2017. It is a taxable passenger transport service (SAC 9964) at 5% (no ITC) or 12%/18% (with ITC). |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 16 | Tvl. Power Lead Electricals v. Deputy State Tax Officer |
2026
|
GSTR-2A vs GSTR-3B mismatch proceedings are not barred by limitation under Sec 73 if the demand falls within the period covered by the exclusion of limitation granted during the Covid-19 pandemic. |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 16 | Akal Trade Links v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) |
2026
|
Denial of ITC solely due to a lack of lorry receipts and weighment slips is unsustainable if the invoices contain vehicle numbers, and the registered supplier paid taxes. The department must actively enquire into the genuineness of the supply. |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 22 | Safety Controls & Devices Ltd., In re |
2026
|
A turnkey contractor registered in UP executing a project in Rajasthan via sub-contractors does not need registration in Rajasthan, provided they control all operations from UP and have no office or fixed establishment in Rajasthan. |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 75 | ISC Processors (P.) Ltd. v. Superintendent Burrabazar Division, Kolkata North |
2026
|
High Court declined writ interference against a Show Cause Notice alleging transactions with non-existent suppliers. The petitioner was directed to exhaust the statutory adjudication remedy by filing a reply. |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 93 | V. Damayanti v. Superintendent of GST and Central Excise |
2026
|
Tax, interest, and penalty recovery for pre-death defaults can proceed against the legal heir of a deceased sole proprietor post-cancellation of registration, but total liability is strictly restricted to the extent of the inherited estate. |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 107 | Chetan Cabletronices (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India |
2026
|
Supreme Court dismissed the SLP, affirming the High Court’s view that writ petitions are not maintainable when an alternative, efficacious statutory remedy of appeal is available under Sec 107. |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Sec 112 | M.M. Traders v. State of U.P. |
2026
|
Supreme Court issued notice against a High Court order which permitted an assessee to approach the newly operational GST Appellate Tribunal within the notified window without limitation objections, treating interim deposits as pre-deposits. |