IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 07.06.2025

SECTION	CASE LAW TITLE	Brief Summary	Citation	Relevant Act
2(4) of CGST Act	Goyal Trading Co. v. Union of India	High Court Bench’s Territorial Jurisdiction for GST Matters Based on Assessee’s Place of Business/Search, Not Just Adjudicating Authority’s Location	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
2(13) of IGST Act	Athene Technologies India LLP v. State of Karnataka	A software development service provider is not an ‘intermediary’ when the master agreement specifies it is an independent provider with no authority to bind the overseas client, and no agency or partnership is created.	Click Here	Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
13 of IGST Act	Amazon Data Services India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of CGST	The supply of data hosting services by a service provider located in India to a cloud computing service provider located outside India constitutes an ‘export’.	Click Here	Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
15 of CGST Act	Vardhman Electronics v. Additional Commissioner, CGST Delhi West	Prima facie, discounts given by manufacturers to retailers could not be considered as a consideration for services rendered by the retailer to promote the manufacturer’s goods.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
16 of CGST Act	Manissery Jayachandran v. Union of India	The Electronic Credit Ledger is like a wallet with separate compartments for CGST, SGST, and IGST; eligible ITC from different heads can be utilized for paying tax under one head.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
16 of CGST Act	Trendships Online Services (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner Commercial Taxes	ITC Denial for Non-Payment of GST by Supplier Upheld: Assessee Failed to Prove Supplier Deposited Tax	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
16 of CGST Act	Kaushlendra Kumar v. State of Bihar	Where ITC for March 2020 was claimed after the due date u/s 16(4), the matter was remanded for fresh consideration due to the insertion of sub-section (5) by Finance Act, 2024, which extended the limitation period.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
29 of CGST Act	Rasi Innovation Pvt Ltd v. Superintendent, Delhi GST	Retrospective GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Due to Vague SCN; Cancellation Valid Only from SCN Date	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
29 of CGST Act	Yogesh Bansal v. Assistant Commissioner Ward 63 State Goods and Service Tax	The department should consider and pass an order on an application for cancellation of GST registration even if the applicant subsequently passes away.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
61 of CGST Act	Raksha Enterprises v. State of U.P.	Orders were quashed and the matter was remanded where notices were uploaded only on the departmental portal without the assessee’s knowledge and the final demand exceeded the amount in the SCN.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
66D of Finance Act, 1994	Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Ltd. v. Union of India	A company executing government projects through third-party contractors and receiving a centage was held liable for service tax as it did not directly render construction services or qualify for exemption as a governmental authority.	Click Here	Finance Act, 1994
69 of CGST Act	Directorate General of GST Intelligence v. Sunny Jain	Bail granted to an accused in an alleged ITC fraud case was upheld because the investigation began in 2020, but no criminal complaint had been filed till date.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
74 of CGST Act	Preeti Khanna v. Additional Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax	A second SCN was held valid as it related to a much larger network of entities allegedly involved in ITC fraud (Rs. 1,000 crores), distinct from the first SCN. A writ petition against the appealable order was not maintainable.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
75 of CGST Act	Parshuram Yadav v. Superintendent GST officer	The High Court will not interfere with an ex-parte order under writ jurisdiction if sufficient opportunities were provided to the assessee. The order remains appealable under Section 107.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
78 of CGST Act	Kaushlendra Kumar v. State of Bihar	Recovery proceedings initiated before the expiry of the mandatory three-month waiting period from the date of service of the order are in violation of the statute. The recovered amount was to be refunded.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
93 of CGST Act	Samban Pharma v. Deputy Commissioner	A tax determination order passed after the death of the proprietor cannot be sustained if no notice was issued to the legal representative.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
107 of CGST Act	Goyal Trading Co. v. Union of India	A plea regarding violation of natural justice (e.g., not providing an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses) should be examined by the appellate authority, not through a writ petition.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
130 of CGST Act	Raj Steel v. State of U.P.	If excess stock is found, proceedings for tax determination under section 73 or 74 should be initiated, not confiscation proceedings under section 130.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
160 of CGST Act	Murali Krishna Enterprises v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax	An assessment order is invalid and liable to be quashed if it lacks the mandatory signature of the assessing officer and the Document Identification Number (DIN).	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
169 of CGST Act	Rahman Sales v. State of Jharkhand	A writ petition was allowed due to a violation of principles of natural justice because the final order (Form GST DRC-07) was not uploaded to the portal or communicated to the assessee’s email.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017