CGST Act 2017
10 articles
No Rent Agreement for the Additional Place, No Ground for Cancellation: Gauhati High Court Restores a GST Registration Cancelled Under Section 29(2)
A Guwahati trader lost his GST registration because he could not produce a rent agreement for an additional place of business that was the subject of a landlord dispute. The Gauhati High Court held that neither Section 29(2), Rule 21 nor Form REG-01 supports cancellation on that ground.
13 min readAn Order Filed in the Wrong Portal Tab Is Not Communicated: Bombay High Court Revives a Time-Barred GST Appeal in Elster Metering
A Section 73 adjudication order was uploaded in the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal and the appeal against it was rejected as late. The Bombay High Court held that filing returns on the portal does not show knowledge of an order placed in the wrong tab, and revived the appeal.
13 min readSeven Days Means Seven Days: Calcutta High Court Quashes Section 129 Penalty Orders Passed 175 Days Late on Two Detained Lorries
Two lorries hired out to a transporter were detained in July 2025 and the penalty orders came in January 2026. The Calcutta High Court held that the seven-day period for the order in Section 129(3) had run out on 24 July 2025, that nothing paused it, and that the orders were barred by limitation and without jurisdiction.
14 min readWho Is the Proper Officer for a Section 122 Penalty? Telangana High Court on Jurisdiction, Section 160 and the Appeal Route in a Rs. 17.27 Crore Fake-Invoice Case
A trader challenged a Section 122 show cause notice and a penalty order on the ground that no proper officer had been assigned that function before CBIC Circular 254/11/2025-GST. The Telangana High Court rejected the jurisdiction plea and sent every other ground to the appellate authority.
15 min readA Refund Cannot Be Swept Against a Stayed Demand: Bombay High Court on Appropriation After the 20% Pre-Deposit Under Section 112 of the CGST Act
The Department sanctioned Trivitron Healthcare a net GST refund of Rs. 64,01,750 and then adjusted every rupee of it against a 2017-20 demand that was under appeal. The Bombay High Court held that, with the pre-deposit paid and recovery stayed, the adjustment could not stand, and ordered the money restored within four weeks.
13 min readThe Date on the Notice, Not the Date on the Form: Delhi High Court on Limitation Under Section 74(2) and 74(10) and Forms GST DRC-01 and DRC-07
Two writ petitions argued that a show cause notice and an order were time-barred because the electronic summary forms carried later dates. The Delhi High Court rejects the argument on the statute and Rule 142, and sends the fraud and ITC grounds to the appellate authority under Section 107.
13 min readA GST Demand Raised After the Resolution Plan Is Approved: Calcutta High Court on Extinguishment of Unclaimed IGST Dues Under Section 31 of the IBC
A GST authority issued a Section 73 notice in September 2025 for 2021-22, two years after Srei Equipment Finance's resolution plan was approved. The Calcutta High Court held the dues extinguished and quashed the notice, the order-in-original and a separate interest notice.
13 min readA Refund Won on Appeal Can Still Be Withheld: Delhi High Court on Section 54(11) of the CGST Act and the Weight of a Pending Investigation
An exporter won five refund appeals, but the Commissioner withheld Rs. 3,15,30,605 under Section 54(11) of the CGST Act. The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ: a proposed appeal alone is not enough, but a pending investigation plus a reasoned opinion of malfeasance or fraud is.
14 min readNo GST on Assignment of Leasehold Rights: Gujarat High Court Extends a Settled Ratio After the Supreme Court Declines to Interfere
A show-cause notice against Hercules Pigments Pvt. Ltd. was quashed in three paragraphs — the Gujarat High Court simply noted that the Supreme Court had, weeks earlier, declined to interfere with its own ruling that assigning a long-term industrial lease is a transfer of immovable property, not a taxable supply of service. The order is thin, but the line of authority behind it is not: this article traces the reasoning back through Gujarat Chamber of Commerce and Industry v. Union of India and KP Green Engineering Ltd. v. Union of India to work out exactly how far the ratio extends, and where it stops.
14 min readBona Fide Buyer, Defaulting Seller: Calcutta High Court Curbs the Mechanical Use of Section 74 to Deny GST Input Tax Credit
A logistics company claimed input tax credit on invoices from a supplier who later stopped filing returns. The department invoked Section 74's fraud-based extended period to raise a Rs. 6.3 crore demand two years after ordinary limitation had run out. The Calcutta High Court quashed the order, applying binding precedent that a buyer's credit cannot be held hostage to a seller's default, and that dressing up an ordinary demand as fraud does not extend the clock.
13 min read