IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 16.01.2026

Relevant Act	Section	Case Law Title	Brief Summary	Citation
IGST Act, 2017	Section 13 (Place of Supply)	Iprocess Clinical Marketing (P.) Ltd. v. ACCT	[Retrospective Benefit] Notification No. 4/2019-Integrated Tax (dated 30-09-2019), which designates the Place of Supply for Pharma R&D services as the recipient’s location (Export), was held to be applicable retrospectively. The assessee conducting clinical trials for foreign clients is entitled to export benefits for prior periods.	Click Here
CGST Act, 2017	Section 20 / Rule 39	BirlaNu Ltd. v. Union of India	[Rule Ultra Vires] Rule 39(1)(a), which mandates that an Input Service Distributor (ISD) must distribute ITC in the same month it is available, was declared ultra vires Section 20. The High Court held that the Act does not impose such a rigid timeline, and the Rule cannot exceed the Act.	Click Here
Central Excise Act / CGST Act	Section 35F (Appeal)	Army Welfare Housing Organisation v. Union of India	[Pre-Deposit via Credit Ledger] Transitional CENVAT Credit lying in the Electronic Credit Ledger can be utilized for making the mandatory pre-deposit (10%) for filing appeals. The Court ruled that pre-deposit is merely an “advance payment of tax/penalty,” which Rule 142(3) allows to be paid via the Credit Ledger.	Click Here
CGST Act, 2017	Section 73/74 (Demand)	BirlaNu Ltd. v. Union of India	[No Suppression] Where ISD credit distribution details were duly disclosed in GSTR-6 returns, the allegation of “suppression” is legally untenable. Consequently, the invocation of the extended period of limitation under Section 74 was set aside.	Click Here
CGST Act, 2017	Section 112 (Tribunal)	Cordant Engineerings India (P.) Ltd. v. State Tax Officer	[Tribunal Remedy] Since the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) timeline has been notified, writ petitions against appellate orders are no longer entertained. The assessee was directed to file an appeal before the Tribunal by making the required pre-deposit under Section 112(8).	Click Here
CGST Act, 2017	Section 122 (Penalty)	Ganapati Ispat v. Union of India	[Jurisdiction Flaw] SCN issued by the Additional Commissioner under Section 122 was quashed because Notification No. 2/2017 only defined territorial jurisdiction but did not confer substantive power to impose penalties. A later circular (No. 254/11/2025) attempting to empower officers cannot validate prior notices.	Click Here
CGST Act, 2017	Section 161 (Rectification)	Excellence4U Research Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACCT	[Rectification Remand] Rejection of a rectification application was set aside because the authority failed to consider key documents like Foreign Inward Remittance Certificates (FIRC) and Bank Realisation Certificates (BRC), which are crucial for export classification.	Click Here

For More :- IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 15.01.2026