Delhi High Court Sets Aside GST Demand Order Despite Delay In Filing Writ, Cites Denial Of Hearing

The Delhi High Court has recently set aside a GST demand order after finding that the taxpayer was not given an opportunity of hearing, even though the writ petition was filed belatedlyA bench of Justices Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Ajay Digpaul set aside a GST demand order passed under Section 73 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, while imposing costs and granting conditional relief to the petitioner.Petitioner had challenged an Order-in-Original confirming a tax demand of over Rs. 20...

Delhi HC Sets Aside GST Demand Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Unserved SCN

The Delhi High Court has recently set aside a GST demand order after finding that the show cause notice (SCN) was not effectively served on the assessee, holding that a reminder issued in respect of such an SCN cannot be treated as a valid communication.A bench of Justices Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Ajay Digpaul thus set aside a GST demand order after finding that the SCN had not been properly communicated to the petitioner.Petitioner challenged the demand order issued under Section 73 of the...

Bombay High Court Sets Aside GST Cancellation Order For Lack Of Reasons

The Bombay High Court has set aside an order cancelling the GST registration of Tex Fab India after finding that the impugned order did not contain any reasons. The Court also recorded that the attachment of the petitioner's bank account had lapsed by operation of law under Section 83(2) of the CGST Act. A bench of Justices G. S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe observed that the issue was no longer res integra and that recording reasons while cancelling GST registration is a settled legal requirement....

Can Dept. Issue One GST Notice Under Sections 73/74 Of CGST Act For Multiple Years? Bombay HC Refers Issue To Larger Bench

The Bombay High Court has referred to a Larger Bench the question of whether the GST Department can issue a single consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years under Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act. Section 73 of the CGST Act deals with the determination of tax not paid or short paid in cases not involving fraud or suppression, while Section 74 governs such determinations in cases involving fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. A Bench of Justices G. S....

Relevant Date Under GST Refund Varies By Claim Type; 2019 Amendment Not Retrospective: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has clarified that the determination of the “relevant date” for computing limitation under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) depends on the nature of the refund claimed, and that the 2019 amendment to the provision cannot be applied retrospectively to defeat vested rights of taxpayers.A Division Bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain was dealing with petitions challenging rejection of refund claims for unutilised input tax...

ARN Cannot Be Equated With Valid GST Registration Certificate: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has recently upheld Oil and Natural Gas Corporation's (ONGC) decision to reject a bid for failure to submit a valid Goods and Services Tax registration certificate at the time of bidding, holding that an Application Reference Number (ARN) cannot substitute a GST certificate in tender processes. A Division Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, while dismissing a writ petition filed by Anantaa-MRKR-Arinfra (JV) Pvt. Ltd., said: “An ARN is only an...

GST Refund Limitation Mandatory; Delay Can Be Condoned Under Article 226 In Cases Of Genuine Hardship: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court held that the two-year limitation under Section 54 of the CGST Act is mandatory, and cannot be relaxed by tax authorities. However, in cases of genuine hardship, delay in filing refund claims may be condoned by invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226, subject to safeguards protecting the Revenue.The Division Bench comprising Justice S.G. Pandit and Justice K.V. Aravind made the ruling. Section 54 of the CGST Act provides provisions for claiming refunds of...

Bombay High Court Orders Fresh Review of V Ships' GST Refund Plea, Says Nature Of Service Not Determined

The Bombay High Court has recently set aside orders rejecting GST refund claims of V Ships India Pvt. Ltd., holding that the appellate authority failed to examine the terms of the service agreement before deciding whether the company's services were exports or intermediary services. A Bench of Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe said the absence of any findings on the agreement, which was relevant to determining the nature of services, vitiated the appellate orders. V Ships India...

Delhi High Court Declines Writ Against GST SCN Corrigendum Allegedly Expanding Tax Period, Cites Appeal Remedy

The Delhi High Court has recently declined to entertain a challenge to a corrigendum allegedly expanding the scope of a show cause notice by including an additional financial year, holding that such issues require factual examination and are not suited for adjudication under Article 226 when an efficacious statutory remedy is available. A Division Bench of Justices Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Ajay Digpaul dismissed a writ petition filed by Manpar Icon Technologies challenging a show cause notice...

Separate GST Liability Orders Must Be Issued To Enable Appeals By Company And MD: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court on 8 April, held that a single, composite GST liability order against a company and its Managing Director cannot be used to deny them independent appellate remedies. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin allowed writ petitions filed by Sugna Metal Limited and its Managing Director, and directed tax authorities to issue separate orders. The judges held: “...,the Managing Director (petitioner in W.P.No.9166 of 2026), after...

Calcutta HC Questions GST Officer's Demand For Personal Appearance When Law Allows Representation Through Counsel

The Calcutta High Court said GST authorities had no basis to insist that a Kanpur-based proprietor appear in person in proceedings over the detention of goods supplied to Maa Kali Traders, especially when the law allows representation through an authorised representative. In an order dated April 7, 2026, Justice Kausik Chanda disposed of a writ petition arising from the detention of a consignment of pan masala and the vehicle carrying it, which had been intercepted while in transit. The Court...

Rajasthan High Court Defreezes Accounts As GST SCN Only Uploaded On Portal, Never Served

The Rajasthan High Court has directed de-freezing of the bank accounts of business entities and their proprietors from Sawai Madhopur after noting their submission that the SCN concerning their GST liability was only uploaded on the portal without being served through any other prescribed mode. Granting interim relief, a division bench of Justice Mahendra Kumar Goyal and Justice Bhuwan Goyal said it would be just and proper to allow operation of the accounts, subject to the deposit of 10% of...