Here’s a Goods and Service Tax (GST) weekly flashback from 04 To 10 January 2026.
Supreme Court
No Stay On Bombay HC’s Order Allowing Inter-State Transfer of Unutilised GST ITC After Amalgamation; SC Issues Notice
Case Title: UOI Versus Umicore Autocat India Private Limited
Case No.: 67126/2025
The Supreme Court did not grant stay but has issued the notice to the taxpayer against a SLP preferred by UOI against Bombay High Court judgment which allowed inter-State transfer of Input Tax Credit (ITC) in cases of merger / amalgamation.
Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Consolidated GST SCN in Fraudulent ITC Cases
Case Title: M/S MATHUR POLYMERS Versus UOI
Case No.: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No. 50279/2025
The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with a judgment of the Delhi High Court which upheld the validity of a consolidated show cause notice (SCN) covering multiple financial years in cases involving alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit (ITC).
Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Email Service of Personal Hearing Notices U/s 169 of CGST Act
Case Title: M/S Mathur Polymers Versus Uoi
Case No.: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 50279/2025
The Supreme Court has upheld the Delhi High Court’s ruling that service of personal hearing notices through the registered email address is valid and sufficient under Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017.
Delhi High Court
Whether Transfer of Development Rights Attracts Service Tax Under Finance Act, 1994? Delhi HC To Decide
Case Title: Principal Commissioner CGST Delhi South vs. Baakir Real Estate Private Limited
Case No.: SERTA 1/2026 & CM APPL. 61/2026, CM APPL. 62/2026, CM APPL. 63/2026
The Delhi High Court began hearing a department’s appeal that brings into sharp focus a long-standing controversy in the real estate sector—whether the transfer of development rights under joint development agreements amounts to a taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994.
Delhi HC Pulls Up DGGI for Delay In Probe; Refuses to Cancel Bail in Rs. 72 Crore GST Evasion Case
Case Title: DGGI Versus Kamal Kishore Aggarwal
Case No.: CRL.M.C. 1786/2020
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) seeking cancellation of bail granted to an accused in a high-value GST evasion case involving alleged tax evasion of nearly ₹72 crore through clandestine supply of cigarettes.
Bombay High Court Questions Jurisdiction of GST SCNs Based on 1/3rd Land Valuation Rule, Grants Interim Protection
Case Title: Khusharav Builders Pvt. Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner (A.E.), CGST and C. Ex.
Case No.: WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 34439 OF 2025
The Bombay High Court has raised serious questions over the jurisdiction of GST authorities to issue show cause notices founded on Paragraph 2 of Notification No. 11/2017–Central Tax (Rate), which mandates a uniform one-third deduction towards the value of land in construction contracts.
Madras High Court
Madras HC Clarifies ‘Relevant Period’ for ITC Refund Calculation Under GST, Allows Exporter to Refile Claim
Case Title: M/s.Sea 6 Energy Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of Central Taxes
Case No.: W.P(MD)No.26287 of 2025
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has disposed of a writ petition challenging the partial rejection of its GST refund claim on accumulated input tax credit (ITC) arising from zero-rated exports, while granting liberty to the company to file a fresh refund application in accordance with law.
No General Penalty U/s 125 Once Late Fee Is Payable On Belated GSTR-9 Filing: Madras HC
Case Title: Ms.Kandan Hardware Mart Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)
Case No.: W.P.Nos.27029
The Madras High Court has held that once a registered person is liable to pay “late fee” under Section 47 of the GST enactments for belated filing of annual return in Form GSTR-9, the tax authorities cannot invoke the general penalty provision under Section 125 of the GST laws for the very same default.
Ignoring CBIC Circulars on Rule 28 Valuation Vitiates GST Demand on Corporate Guarantee: Madras High Court
Case Title: M/s.Amman Try Trading Company Private Limited Versus The State Tax Officer
Case No.: W.P(MD)No.20109 of 2025
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has set aside a GST demand raised on the furnishing of a corporate guarantee between related parties, holding that the tax authority failed to consider binding CBIC circulars relied upon by the assessee.
Calcutta High Court
GST Dept. Can’t Seize Cash Without Evidentiary Link to Tax Evasion: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Puspa Furniture Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Union Of India & Ors.
Case No.: WPA 19155 of 2025
The Calcutta High Court has held that the Goods and Services Tax (GST) department has no power to seize or seal cash merely on suspicion of it being unaccounted, unless the currency itself has direct evidentiary relevance to proceedings under the GST law.
Patna High Court
Patna High Court Quashes GST Assessment for Illegal Inspection, Cautions Tax Officers
Case Title: M/S R.S. Enterprises Versus The State of Bihar
Case No.: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8422 of 2024
The Patna High Court has set aside a GST assessment order passed against a Bihar-based proprietary firm after holding that the underlying inspection was conducted in violation of mandatory legal safeguards under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
Allahabad High Court
GST Tribunal Now Functional: Allahabad HC Directs Assessee to Avail Statutory Appeal Remedy, Grants Time Till June 30, 2026
Case Title: M/S Hind Timber Merchant Versus Additional Commissioner Grade-2 Appeals Judicial Division-I State Tax And Another
Case No.: Writ Tax No. – 2511 Of 2025
The Allahabad High Court has disposed of a writ petition filed by M/s Hind Timber Merchant after noting that the long-awaited Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has now been constituted and made functional by the Central Government.
Wrong SCN Issued; Allahabad HC Quashes GST Demand
Case Title: M/S Meena Leather Industries Versus State Of U.P.
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. – 1639 of 2025
The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has set aside a GST assessment order imposing tax, interest and penalty amounting to Rs. 12.35 lakh for the financial year 2019–20, holding that since the show cause notice at the time of initiation itself was wrong, it was the duty of the authorities to once again issue a fresh show cause notice to the petitioner in accordance with law.
Allahabad HC Declines to Quash GST Fraud Notice, Directs Dept. To Disclose Adverse Material
Case Title: Pilcon Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of U.P. and Another
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. – 7200 of 2025
The Allahabad High Court has declined to interfere at the preliminary stage with a show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (UP GST) Act, 2017, alleging fraudulent availment of input tax credit (ITC). However, the Court has directed the GST department to furnish all adverse material including Relied Upon Documents (RUDs), statements etc. relied upon against the taxpayer before proceeding further with adjudication.
Time Spent on Rectification Can’t Make Appeal Late: Allahabad HC Allows GST Appeal
Case Title: M/S Prakash Medical Stores Versus UOI
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. – 5865 of 2025
The Allahabad High Court has held that the underlying principle of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963—aimed at advancing substantial justice—would apply to appeals filed under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (UP GST) Act, 2017, even though the Limitation Act does not apply in strict terms to GST proceedings.
GST Proceedings Against Deceased Invalid: Allahabad HC Says Entire Action Bad in Law Without Notice to Legal Heirs
Case Title: Ashwani Kumar Pandey Versus State of UP
Case No.: Writ Tax No. – 1559 Of 2025
The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has quashed Goods and Services Tax (GST) proceedings initiated against a deceased proprietor, holding that proceedings cannot be initiated against a person who is deceased. Thus, proceedings cannot be initiated against the legal heirs of the deceased or against the estate of the deceased. However, it was open to the authorities to proceed in proper manner against the legal representative/heirs of the deceased proprietor and having failed to do so, the entire proceedings initiated from the stage of show cause notice is bad in law.
GST Assessment Against Deceased Person Invalid, S. 93 Doesn’t Permit Determination After Death: Allahabad HC
Case Title: Sambul Shahid Versus State Of U.P.
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. – 1425 of 2025
The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has held that Goods and Services Tax (GST) proceedings initiated in the name of a deceased proprietor are legally unsustainable, ruling that Section 93 of the GST Act permits recovery from legal heirs but does not authorise issuance of show cause notices or determination of tax liability against a dead person.
GST Vehicle Seizure Challenged Despite Available Statutory Appeal: Allahabad HC Refuses Writ Relief
Case Title: M/S Lymer Enterprises Versus State of UP
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. – 7844 of 2025
The Allahabad High Court has declined to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in a Goods and Services Tax (GST) dispute involving seizure of goods and vehicle, holding that the petitioner must avail the statutory appellate remedy as disputed questions of fact were involved.
GST Penalty on Expired E-Way Bill Quashed Citing Technical Auto-Population Error: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: M/S Metropolis Logistics Pvt Ltd Versus Additional Commissioner And 2 Others
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. – 233 of 2020
The Allahabad High Court has quashed a GST penalty and seizure order imposed solely on the ground of expiry of an e-way bill, holding that such expiry, when caused by a technical auto-population error and without any intent to evade tax, cannot justify punitive action.
Karnataka High Court
Non-Filing of LUT Before Export Not Fatal to GST Refund Claims: Karnataka High Court
Case Title: M/S Prime Perfumery Works Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax South Division-3
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 11076 Of 2024 (T-Res)
The Karnataka High Court has held that non-submission of a Letter of Undertaking (LUT) or bond prior to export cannot be treated as a fatal defect for denying GST refunds, especially when exports are otherwise undisputed. The Court set aside a refund rejection order passed by GST authorities and remanded the matter for fresh consideration in light of binding CBIC circulars.
GST Recovery From Third-Party Company Quashed; Karnataka HC Reaffirms Limits on Garnishee Proceedings
Case Title: M/S Ramms India Private Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Audit)-3.1
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 34270 Of 2025 (T-Res)
While reinforcing the doctrine of corporate separateness and procedural safeguards under GST law, the Karnataka High Court has quashed a coercive tax recovery initiated against a third party company that was not the assessee in default, holding that GST Department cannot recover dues of one company from another merely because they share a common director.
IGST Refund Proceedings After Omission of Rule 96(10) Quashed: Karnataka High Court
Case Title: M/S Hikal Limited Versus UOI
Case No.: Writ Petition No.15251 Of 2020 (T-Res)
The Karnataka High Court has quashed show cause notices and related proceedings initiated under Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, holding that such actions cannot survive after the rule’s omission from the statute book and in view of consistent High Court jurisprudence striking it down as unconstitutional.
Karnataka HC Grants Bail in GST Fraud Case, Holds Fear of Witness Tampering Unfounded
Case Title: Shri Mohammed Kamran Versus The Senior Intelligence Officer Directorate General Of Goods And Service Tax Intelligence
Case No.: Criminal Petition No. 16884 Of 2025 (439(Cr.Pc) / 483(Bnss))
The Karnataka High Court has granted regular bail to an accused arrested in connection with alleged offences under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, observing that the apprehension of witness tampering and obstruction of justice was not supported by material on record.
Composite GST SCN U/s 74 Invalid: Karnataka HC
Case Title: M/S. Edge Solutions Versus The Joint Commissioner Of Central Tax
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 22647 Of 2022 (T-Res)
The Karnataka High Court has quashed a GST demand order issued under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, on the ground that the tax authorities impermissibly clubbed multiple tax periods into a single composite show cause notice.
Himachal Pradesh High Court
Himachal Pradesh HC Allows Manual Filing of GSTR-3B to Claim Missed ITC
Case Title: Shivam Electric Corporation Versus UOI
Case No.: CWP No.8053 of 2025
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has permitted a taxpayer to manually file its GSTR-3B return for the quarter ending March 2021 to claim unavailed Input Tax Credit (ITC) of over Rs. 10.54 lakh, holding that such permission would not automatically nullify an already confirmed tax demand.
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Notification No. 2/2017 Only Fixes Territorial Jurisdiction, Doesn’t Confer Power to Invoke S. 122 CGST Act: Andhra Pradesh HC
Case Title: GANAPATI ISPAT Versus UOI
Case No.: WRIT PETITION NO: 31263/2025
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has observed that Notification No. 2/2017 only fixes territorial jurisdiction, doesn’t confer power to invoke Section 122 CGST Act.
Tripura High Court
Section 16(2)(c) CGST Act Valid but READ DOWN; ITC Can’t Be Denied to Bona Fide Buyers Says Tripura High Court
Case Title: M/S. Sahil Enterprises Versus UOI
Case No.: WP(C) No.688 of 2022
The Tripura High Court has held that while upholding the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, “read down” the provision to ensure that genuine buyers are not penalised for the default of sellers.
Telangana High Court
Pre-Deposit Technicality Can’t Defeat GST Appeal: Telangana HC Remands Matter, Lifts DRC-13 Bank Attachment
Case Title: Jhabakh Auto Private Limited Versus The Joint Commissioner of Central Tax
Case No.: Writ Petition No.40702 of 2025
The Telangana High Court has held that a GST appeal cannot be rejected merely on technical grounds relating to the timing or mode of pre-deposit when the appeal itself is filed within the prescribed limitation period and the statutory pre-deposit stands made.
Read More: LIVE | Gyanotsav 2026 Day 2: A Power-Packed Knowledge Marathon After a Blockbuster Opening Day
