| Section 5 |
MGM Oil Mills (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India |
Quashed IGST demands on ocean freight following the Supreme Court ruling in Mohit Minerals, as no legal basis remained for such a levy. |
Click here |
IGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 9 |
Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise v. Riddhi Pharma |
Assignment of GIDC leasehold rights in industrial plot is a transfer of benefits arising from immovable property and not subject to GST as a service. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 16 |
Manoranjan Dash v. Commissionerate of CT GST, Commissioner, Odisha |
Tax demand was rightly sustained where works contractor claimed excess ITC over GSTR-2A and failed to prove tax payment by supplier under the provisional credit regime. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 16 |
Gold Youth Movement Recreation Club v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) |
Demand based solely on limitation was quashed because ITC fell within the statutory window under Sec 16(5), though reversed earlier under Sec 16(4). |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 20 |
Sapna Industries v. Commissioner of State Tax |
Penalty and interest under Sec 50(1) and 73(9) sustained due to unpaid IGST on additional supplies shown via duplicate e-way bills; lack of fraud does not extinguish liability. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 20 |
Sapna Industries v. Commissioner of State Tax |
Reissued e-way bills for same invoices without continuous transit proof were independent supply declarations, sustaining the IGST demand, interest, and penalty. |
Click here |
IGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 29 |
Ratul Boro v. Union of India |
Registration cancelled for non-filing restored subject to filing pending returns in 30 days and paying tax, interest, penalty, and late fees despite expiry of 270-day portal limit. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 29 |
H.I. International v. Himanshu Verma |
Retrospective cancellation and ITC reversal based on grounds outside the original SCN were legally unsustainable; cancellation was revoked. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 29 |
Mohammed Luthfur Rahman v. Union of India |
Cancellation of GST registration for non-submission of rent agreement for an additional place of business was set aside as rules do not mandate it when principal place documents are valid. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 50 |
Manoranjan Dash v. Commissionerate of CT GST, Commissioner, Odisha |
Interest on mismatched ITC is chargeable, but invoice-level matching is required; separate interest based on Rule 36(4) was deleted for lack of mention in SCN. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 73 |
Nitin Bakers (P.) Ltd. v. Vijay Singh Visen |
Demands made solely by comparing GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C portal variances without verifying sales ledgers, invoices, and reversals were set aside and remanded. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 73 |
Nitin Bakers (P.) Ltd. v. Vijay Singh Visen |
Ex-parte demand for excess ITC based on GSTR-3B vs. 2A variances without factoring in self-disclosed reversals was invalid; remanded for net ITC verification. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 73 |
Nitin Bakers (P.) Ltd. v. Vijay Singh Visen |
Demanding full ITC reversal by treating all credit as common without segregating exempt vs. taxable turnover ratios required remand for proper rule-based mapping and credit segregation. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 74 |
Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise v. Riddhi Pharma |
Minor delays in issuing invoices or paying GST with interest on bona fide non-taxable positions do not constitute fraud or suppression; Sec 74 penalties were set aside. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 75 |
Manoranjan Dash v. Commissionerate of CT GST, Commissioner, Odisha |
Additional interest imposed under Rule 36(4) by the appellate authority without prior proposal in the SCN violated Sec 75 natural justice and was deleted. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 107 |
H.I. International v. Himanshu Verma |
Appellate Authority cannot introduce cash deposit or ITC reversal conditions in a registration appeal without issuing a separate SCN and hearing the taxpayer. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 107 |
H.I. International v. Himanshu Verma |
Adjudicating ITC entitlement and ordering cash deposits in a pure registration cancellation appeal exceeds the statutory scope of appellate jurisdiction under Sec 107. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 128A |
Hayakriva Associates and Builders v. Deputy Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise |
Once a Sec 128A waiver of interest/penalty under Sec 73 is formally approved via Form GST SPL-05, it cannot be revoked unless conditions under Rule 164(16)/(17) are met. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 132 |
Directorate General of GST Intelligence v. State of Andhra Pradesh |
Grant of bail to an alleged fake ITC mastermind was upheld because evidence was documentary and custodial interrogation was no longer required. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
| Section 132 |
Directorate General of GST Intelligence v. State of Andhra Pradesh |
Petition to cancel bail in fake ITC probe was dismissed as the prosecution failed to substantiate claims of post-bail witness intimidation or non-cooperation with sworn proof. |
Click here |
CGST Act, 2017 |
