IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 27.12.2025
| Relevant Act | Section / Rule | Case Law Title / Notification | Brief Summary | Citation / Source |
| CGST Act, 2017 | GSTAT Rules Amendment | CBIC Notification G.S.R. 918(E) | The Government amended GSTAT recruitment rules for Group ‘C’ employees. Key changes: Educational qualification for Stenographer Grade II lowered from a Degree to 12th Pass, and the deputation provision for Upper Division Clerks (UDC) was removed. | 24-12-2025 |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 9 | NBCC (India) Ltd. v. Addl. Commissioner CGST Delhi South | GST demand on lease proceeds for redeveloped areas transferred to an escrow for the Ministry was quashed. The court held that under the CGST Act, joint and several liability for an agent (NBCC) applies only to goods and not to services. | Click Here |
| Customs Act, 1962 | Section 12 | Noya Infrastructure LLP v. Union of India | Detention of imported oil was unsustainable. CRCL reports were non-definitive regarding “diesel-fraction” traits and only showed minor cloud point deviation. Applying the “most akin” test, the cargo was correctly classified as Distillate Oil. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 29 | Modi Packers v. Superintendent | Retrospective cancellation of GST registration was held unsustainable because the SCN failed to propose such retrospective action and the final order was silent on reasons for choosing that specific date. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 54 | Ma Agro v. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax | The Revenue cannot refuse to process a refund directed by an Appellate Authority merely because they plan to appeal that order. In the absence of a stay from a higher court, the order must be complied with. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 69 | Mohd. Farhan v. State of Chhattisgarh | Anticipatory bail granted in an ITC/fake e-way bill case. As the evidence was primarily digital and already in the department’s custody, and there was no risk of the petitioner absconding, custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 97 | Sweet Spot Spaces, In re | AAR rejected an application from a co-working space provider asking if its clients could get GST registration. Such a ruling must be sought by the clients (the recipients) and not by the service provider. | Click Here |
| CGST Act, 2017 | Section 169 | Nikhil Debnath v. Union of India | No coercive action could be taken against the petitioner as there was no proper service of the order. Mere uploading on the portal is insufficient if it is not served as per the modes prescribed in Section 169. | Click Here |
For More :- Read IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 20.12.2025