Madras High Court Holds ITC Claim Based On Fabricated Agreement Invalid, Upholds GST Demand

The Madras High Court on 30 June held that input tax credit (ITC) cannot be claimed on the basis of a fabricated contractual arrangement, where the agreement and supporting invoices do not establish a genuine business transaction. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy dismissed two writ petitions filed by a proprietorship challenging GST assessment orders for financial years 2022-23 and 2023-24, thereby upholding the demand of tax, interest and penalty confirmed under Section 74 of the GST...

Belated Allegation Of Coercion Cannot Justify GST Refund After Voluntary Payment: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court on 25 June held that a taxpayer cannot claim a refund of GST, interest and penalty voluntarily paid during search proceedings by alleging coercion nearly two years later, ruling that the belated allegation was merely an afterthought to secure a refund and that the delayed issuance of Form GST DRC-04 acknowledging the voluntary payment did not invalidate the proceedings. A Division Bench of Justices A.S. Supehia and Vaibhavi D. Nanavati dismissed the writ petition filed...

GST Reimbursement Tied To Contractual Terms, Cannot Override Statutory Scheme: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on 25 June held that disputes concerning reimbursement of additional GST liability arise out of contractual arrangements between contractors and employers and cannot be used to alter or override the statutory framework governing GST levy, assessment and recovery. A Division Bench of Justices S.G. Pandit and Rajesh Rai K. modified a Single Judge's order that had directed reimbursement of GST amounts to a contractor, which was passed relying on Sri Chandrashekaraiah and...

Mere Intimation To GST Authorities Does Not Create ITC Right Or Bar Section 74 Action: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that mere communication to GST authorities expressing an intention to avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) does not create any legal entitlement to such credit and cannot shield a taxpayer from proceedings for wrongful availment under the GST law. Justice C. Saravanan dismissed the petition filed by RMZ Infinity (Chennai) Pvt. Ltd., now known as Chennai Business Tower Private Limited, which had challenged an order confirming denial of ineligible ITC of Rs. 92.29 crore for...

Taxpayer Cannot Claim Refund After Transitioning VAT Input Tax Credit To GST: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has recently held that a taxpayer who chooses to carry forward accumulated VAT input tax credit into the GST regime cannot later seek a cash refund of the same credit. Upholding the rejection of a refund claim of ₹18.75 lakh, the court observed that while transitional credit can be used to discharge output tax liability, it cannot be refunded once it has been carried forward into the GST regime. A division bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati...

GST Notice To Amalgamated Company That Ceased To Exist Without Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently quashed a GST order against a real estate company. It held that a show cause notice issued after the company had ceased to exist pursuant to its amalgamation was without jurisdiction, making the proceedings that followed legally unsustainable. A division bench of Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Advait M. Sethna allowed the writ petition filed by Kanakia Spaces Realty Private Limited and set aside the Order-in-Original passed by the GST authorities. The bench...

Transit State Lacks Jurisdiction To Levy GST Penalty Without Taxable Transaction: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a State through which goods merely transit cannot invoke Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, to detain goods and levy penalty for the absence of an e-tax invoice where no taxable transaction takes place within that State. A Division Bench of Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Swarupama Chaturvedi on 14 May allowed a writ petition filed by Maruti Enterprises and connected matters, holding that the Uttar Pradesh GST authorities lacked...

GST Registration Cannot Be Cancelled Through Cryptic, Non-Speaking Orders: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court has recently set aside an order cancelling a taxpayer's GST registration, holding that an adjudicating authority cannot pass a cryptic and non-speaking order that carries adverse civil consequences. The court observed that even where a taxpayer fails to respond to a show cause notice, the statutory authority remains under an obligation to provide reasons and demonstrate application of mind while cancelling registration. "If an order is passed without giving a proper...

GST Writ Petition Not Maintainable After Statutory Appeal Limitation Expires: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a taxpayer cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to bypass the statutory limitation period prescribed for filing an appeal under the GST Act, refusing to entertain a challenge to an assessment order filed after the expiry of the appellate limitation period. A Division Bench comprising Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary dismissed a writ petition filed by Mishra Security Services, holding that entertaining the petition would undermine the...

GST Proceedings Maintainable Against Heirs Even Without Action During Taxpayer's Lifetime: Madras HC

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on 16 June held that Section 93 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 permits GST authorities to initiate proceedings against the legal heirs of a deceased taxpayer even if no proceedings were initiated during the taxpayer's lifetime. Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy dismissed a writ petition filed by V. Damayanti, wife of the late V. Vasudevan, proprietor of Vasu Chemicals, challenging proceedings initiated after Vasudevan's death. He held:...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Extension Of GSTAT Appeal Deadline, Refuses Interim Relief

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice on a plea filed by the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Bar Association, Delhi, challenging the June 30, 2026 deadline for filing appeals before the GSTAT in respect of orders communicated prior to April 1, 2026 and seeking extension of the filing period by at least three months from June 15, 2026, when the e-filing procedure was formally explained to stakeholders.However, the court declined to grant any interim relief at this stage. A vacation bench...

Madras High Court Upholds GST Proceedings Over Mismatch Between Seigniorage Fees and Reported Turnover

The Madras High Court has upheld GST proceedings against a quarry operator. It held that a mismatch between seigniorage fees paid for mineral extraction and the value of outward supplies reported in GST returns was sufficient to justify the tax department's prima facie view that turnover had been suppressed. Justice C. Saravanan dismissed writ petitions filed by KPR Enterprises for the 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 tax periods. "Since the petitioner has paid a huge amount for the seigniorage...