Stay updated
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Benito Operations and Technologies Pvt. Ltd. held that once an appeal has been filed against an adjudication order, along with the mandatory pre-deposit as required under Section 107(6) of the CGST Act. The provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83 cannot be sustained and is to be set aside.
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chegg India Private Limited held that the Appellate Authority is empowered under Section 107(11) of the CGST Act to comprehensively re-adjudicate refund claims, including considering fresh documents and all periods together, and must avoid the inconsistencies caused by staggered, piecemeal adjudication.
The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sharp Tanks and Structurals Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner GST Appeals & Ors. [W.P.MD Nos. 24684-24685 of 2025, order dated September 17, 2025] held that the limitation period for filing appeals under Section 107 of the CGST Act begins only when the order is effectively communicated to the assessee through recognized modes such as personal delivery, registered post, or courier, and mere uploading of the order on the GSTN portal does not constitute effective communication.
THE HON’BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT in the case of Hriday Kumar Das V/s State of West Bengal, decided on 21-8-2024
THE HON’BLE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Reddy Enterprises V/s Appellate Authority & Additional Commissioner (ST) Writ Petition No. 12355 of 2024, decided on 5-7-2024
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Ambika Traders held that a consolidated SCN for multiple financial years is permissible under the CGST Act, 2017, particularly in cases of fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) availment.
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhupender Kumar declined to entertain the writ petition challenging penalty under Section 122(1A), holding that the petitioner failed to rebut allegations and has an alternative remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar Wadhera held that where serious allegations of fraudulent availment of IGST refunds are levelled against the Petitioner, and opportunity of hearing was available but not availed, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 could not be invoked and the Petitioner must approach the appellate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
Synopsis: The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition involving fraudulent ITC claims, directing the petitioner to pursue appellate remedy u/s 107 of the CGST Act.
Synopsis: Delhi High Court allowed petitioners to pursue appellate remedies though Court noted petitioners had sufficient information to respond to SCN but failed to do so in a timely manner and had not been diligent.