NEW GST CASE LAWS 20.05.2025

Here is the compiled and structured case law analysis table for the Goods and Services Tax (GST) updates, organized cleanly for quick reference.

Relevant Act	Section	Case Law Title	Citation	Brief Summary
CGST Act, 2017	Section 6	V.M. & Co. v. State Tax Officer	Click Here	Once the Central GST authority adjudicates a tax liability for specific differences (e.g., ITR vs. GSTR-3B), State GST authorities cannot initiate parallel proceedings on the same subject matter.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 29	A One Industries v. Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs	Click Here	A registration cannot be cancelled retrospectively if the Show Cause Notice (SCN) did not explicitly propose a retrospective effect or disclose the relied-upon material.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 54	CHEC-TPL line 4 joint venture v. Union of India	no	The amendment to Rule 89(5) via Notification No. 14/2022 (fixing the inverted duty refund formula anomaly) is clarificatory and retrospective; refunds cannot be denied for applications filed prior to July 5, 2022.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 73	Biotech Pest Control India (P.) Ltd. v. Superintendent of Central Tax	Click Here	Where a taxpayer voluntarily pays tax but an adjudication/recovery notice is still issued incorrectly, the proper remedy is to seek rectification rather than invoking writ jurisdiction.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 74	Tvl.T.Balasubramanian v. State Tax Officer	no	Section 74 penalty proceedings cannot be sustained if the differential tax was paid before the notice and there is no express allegation or proof of an intention to evade tax or suppress facts.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 107	Rameshwari Narpatram Bishnoi v. Union of India	Click Here	High Courts can invoke writ powers to condone a delay in filing a statutory appeal (even beyond the Appellate Authority’s condonable limits) under extraordinary circumstances affecting livelihood.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 107	Abdul Rahiman Kunju v. Deputy Commissioner	Click Here	If a taxpayer actively participates in proceedings and replies to Form GST DRC-01 by treating it as an SCN, they cannot later bypass the statutory appellate remedy by calling the order void.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 129	Kishan Cement Stores v. State of Bihar	Click Here	A writ petition is not maintainable against transit detention if the person-in-charge voluntarily paid the tax/penalty without protest to release the goods, failing to exhaust statutory appeals.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 130	Sreekrishna Traders v. State of Karnataka	Click Here	Once a formal confiscation order is passed under Section 130 and the title vests in the Government, the release mechanism of Section 129 becomes completely inapplicable.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 160	Srinivasa Agencies v. Superintendent of Central Tax	Click Here	An assessment order uploaded on the GST portal without the Assessing Officer’s physical or digital signature carries an incurable procedural defect and is legally invalid.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 160	Anne Lakshmana Rao v. Assistant Commissioner	Click Here	The absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) or Reference Number (RFN) on a portal-issued assessment order constitutes an inherent defect that renders it liable to be quashed.
CGST Act, 2017	Section 160	Maddala Industries v. Assistant Commissioner	Click Here	Assessment orders issued in Form GST DRC-07 that lack both an official signature and a DIN are completely vitiated; Rule 26(3) cannot save such non-compliant service.

Note on GSTN Advisory: The GSTN has introduced an Excel-based Annexure-B Offline Utility to streamline applications for accumulated ITC refunds (including exports without payment of tax, SEZ supplies, and inverted duty structures). This tool mandates HSN/SAC-wise invoice reporting and uses JSON uploads alongside automated GSTR-2B validation to standardise processing.