IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 02.02.2026

Section	Case Law	Core Ruling & Strategic Summary	Citation
S. 16(6)	Saleena Shahul Hameed	[Non-Retrospective ITC] Benefit of the newly inserted S. 16(6) (enabling ITC upon registration revocation) is not retrospective. Taxpayers who closed business and didn’t challenge prior demands cannot claim this benefit.	Click Here
S. 29	Sivanandan	[Registration Restoration] Even if interim relief was secured by suppressing facts, the Court quashed the cancellation and restored registration upon payment of tax dues and full compliance.	Click Here
S. 93	Rajvanti Devi	[Deceased Taxpayer] An SCN and subsequent tax determination made against a dead person without issuing notice to the legal representative is legally unsustainable.	Click Here
R. 142(1)(a)	Dhaneswar Kalita	[SCN vs. DRC-01] A summary of SCN in Form DRC-01 is a supplementary document, not a substitute for a proper SCN. Proceedings initiated only via DRC-01 are invalid.	Click Here
S. 160	T.V. Srinivasulu	[Unsigned Orders] An assessment order without the physical or digital signature of the officer is invalid. Delay in filing a writ is irrelevant if the order itself was never validly served.	Click Here
S. 160	Kudos Facility Services	[Digital Validity] If an order has an auto-generated RFN (Reference Number) and was uploaded to the portal, it is considered digitally signed and valid, even if a physical signature is absent.	Click Here
S. 169	Praveen Constructions	[Alternative Service] If there is no response to a portal notice, the officer must explore other modes (preferably RPAD) before passing an order. Lack of hearing violates natural justice.	Click Here
S. 169	Sathiah Ramesh	[Repeated Reminders] While portal service is “sufficient,” if an assessee remains unresponsive despite reminders, the officer should use RPAD to ensure the taxpayer is actually informed.	Click Here

For More :- Read IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 28.02.2026