GST CASE LAWS 7.10.2026
GST CASE LAWS 7.10.2026
| Relevant Act | Section | Case Law Title | Citation | Brief Summary |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 6 | State Tax Officer v. Sree Amman Traders | Click Here | Absence of a separate notification does not invalidate cross-empowerment between State and Central GST officers, as cross-empowerment validity is established and CBIC circulars clarify no notification is required for enabling provisions. |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 16 | Shaurya Alloys (P.) Ltd. v. State of Punjab | Click Here | Constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) was upheld as valid and within legislative competence; it cannot be read down to apply only to fraud or bogus invoices, but must operate within an integrated matching scheme. |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 16 | Shaurya Alloys (P.) Ltd. v. State of Punjab | Click Here | ITC cannot be denied or reversed solely due to supplier default or retrospective registration cancellation without inquiring into the purchaser’s bona fides, providing hearing opportunities, and demonstrating fraud/collusion. |
| Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 | Section 16 | Shaurya Alloys (P.) Ltd. v. State of Punjab | Click Here | Statutory amendments and mechanisms (such as Rule 37A) mandating ITC reversal upon supplier default operate only prospectively and cannot be applied retrospectively to prior tax periods. |

