IMPORTANT GST CASE LAWS 30.10.25

Section	Case Law Title	Brief Summary	Citation	Relevant Act
$\S 7$	Dynamic Techno Medicals (P.) Ltd., In re	Issuance of demo sets of health aid products to specialists/executives for marketing/display, where ownership is retained and there is no sale or transfer of title, does not constitute ‘disposal’ or ‘supply’ under GST.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 17$	Dynamic Techno Medicals (P.) Ltd., In re	Input Tax Credit (ITC) on demo goods issued for live demonstration and display, where ownership is retained and there is no sale or permanent transfer, is not barred as there is no disposal to trigger $\S 17(5)(\text{h})$ restriction. Reversal of ITC is not required.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 54$	Union of India v. Messrs Meghmani Organochem Ltd.	SLP dismissed: A Special Economic Zone (SEZ) unit is entitled to a refund of Input Tax Credit (ITC) paid in connection with goods or services, even if the ITC was distributed by an Input Service Distributor (ISD), as the supplier cannot file for the refund in such a scenario.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 73$	Sri. Venkatesh Fibre Corporation v. State of Telangana	The adjudication order and DRC-07 issued on 01.05.2024, after the extended limitation period up to 30.04.2024, were vitiated by limitation, leading to the quashing of the bank attachment and the setting aside of the impugned orders.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 73$	Om Prakash Wadhawan v. State of U.P.	A tax determination proceeding, where the Show Cause Notice (SCN) and order were issued posthumously against a deceased proprietor without service on the legal representative, was unsustainable. The impugned order was quashed.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 73$	Octantis Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India	SCN served on the last day of limitation via the old email (after a change was authorized on the portal) and reaching the authorized email only after the deadline was not valid. SCN for FY 2020-21 was considered time-barred due to improper and untimely service.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 75$	Shri Radhe Contractor v. Union of India	An order raising a penalty and interest amount beyond the amount specified in the Show Cause Notice (SCN) was in violation of $\S 75(7)$ and could not be sustained.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 83$	Shree Momai Enterprises Mannequins Cosmetic India v. State of Maharashtra	The High Court modified the provisional attachment of bank accounts to allow operations, conditional on the balances not falling below the levels on the attachment/hearing date, to address the prejudice caused by disproportionate attachment.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 107$	Tvl. Saravana Projects & Co. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC), Chennai	Where there was no procedural infirmity in the assessment order, the writ petition was dismissed, as merits review under Article 226 was not permissible after the appeal condonation period, with liberty to file an appeal.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 107$	Parshotam Electronics v. UT of J & K	The Appellate Authority’s order dismissing an appeal as time-barred was set aside, and the delay was condoned due to genuine medical reasons (serious health issues and surgery), allowing the appeal to be heard on merits.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 107$	R M Dairy Products LLP v. State of UP	A sum deposited under protest during the investigation of a disputed tax matter could be appropriated towards the mandatory 10 percent pre-deposit required for filing an appeal under $\S 107(6)(\text{ii})$ .	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 160$	Abrars Today Fashion Mall v. Assistant Commissioner	The absence of a signature on the summary in FORM GST DRC-07 by the Assessing Authority rendered the assessment and appellate orders unsustainable, as this infirmity is not curable by saving or service provisions. Orders were set aside.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
$\S 160$	Abrars Today Fashion Mall v. Assistant Commissioner	Assessment and penalty orders passed without issuing a prior pre-tax intimation for the pre-amendment period (as mandated by law) were rendered invalid due to the breach of statutory procedure and were remanded for a fresh assessment.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

Editorial Note on GSTN Advisory:

Section	Case Law Title	Brief Summary	Citation	Relevant Act
N/A	GSTN issues advisory on filing pending GST returns before expiry of three-years	GSTN advisory states that various GST returns (GSTR-1, 3B, 4, 5, 5A, 6, 7, 8, 9) cannot be filed after three years from their due date, as per the Finance Act, 2023. The portal will block returns overdue by more than three years from November 2025.	Click Here	Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Finance Act, 2023

For More :- Read