Latest GST Case Laws Update 

A comprehensive analysis of recent Supreme Court and High Court rulings impacting GST litigation, compliance, and departmental procedure.

---

1. Delhi High Court to Examine Audit Lapses in Fruit Mixture Classification Dispute

Case: Hind Agro Sales vs Additional Commissioner, CGST Audit-I & Ors., W.P.(C) 16744/2025

Background

The dispute concerns the correct GST classification of “fruit mixture.”

• Assessee’s position: HSN 2008 97 00 (12% GST)

• Revenue’s position: HSN 2106 90 70 (18% GST), covering “miscellaneous edible preparations”

Core Issue

Whether the audit report forming the basis of the SCN was prepared without considering the annexures submitted by the taxpayer in response to the audit memo.

Key Observations of the Court

• Post-audit communications from the Revenue seeking documents already submitted indicate that the audit report may have been finalized without perusing material evidence.

• Such procedural lapses can affect the validity of the SCN.

Limitation Issue Under Section 65

The assessee argued that the audit was time-barred.

• The Delhi HC rejected this contention, relying on Varian Medical Systems International India Pvt. Ltd., observing that the report was issued within statutory timelines.

Interim Directions

• Revenue to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks.

• Department may proceed to pass an order on the SCN, but such order shall not be given effect till the next hearing date.

• The Court thus preserved the assessee’s substantive rights pending final adjudication.

---

2. Bombay HC to Resolve Divergent Views on Consolidated SCNs for Multiple Years

Case: HMM Shipping India Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India & Ors., W.P. No. 2021/2025

Background

The assessee challenged an SCN that clubbed multiple years of GST/Service Tax demands into a single consolidated notice.

Arguments

• Assessee:

  • Consolidation is impermissible.

  • Relied on Milroc Good Earth Developers, which held clubbing of years to be procedurally irregular.

• Department:

  • Relied on RioCare India Pvt. Ltd., where consolidation was upheld.

  • Asserted that later benches have consistently adopted the RioCare view.

Court’s Concern

• Clear conflict between coordinate benches on the legality of consolidated SCNs.

• This creates uncertainty for departmental audits and taxpayer compliance.

Order

• Both sides to furnish compilations of precedents.

• Court will examine (i) whether the issue is covered by existing judgments and
  (ii) whether a writ against a mere SCN is maintainable.

• Matter listed for 2 December 2025.

---

3. Supreme Court Stays ?123 Crore GST SCN to Baazi Games Pending Gameskraft Verdict

Case: Baazi Games Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 1032/2025

Background

The SCN alleges GST liability by treating online gaming transactions as “actionable claims” taxable under Rule 31A(3).

Major Legal Questions Raised

1. Validity of Rule 31A(3):

   • Assessee argued that the rule exceeds delegated powers, contradicting Section 15(1) (transaction value).

2. Constitutional validity of Section 15(5):

   • Alleged inconsistency with Article 246A and Section 15(1).

3. Jurisdictional challenge:

   • Matter is already sub judice in Gameskraft; hence adjudication would be premature.

Supreme Court’s View

• Since final judgment in Gameskraft has been reserved since August 2025, proceeding with Baazi’s SCN would be futile.

• Therefore, all further proceedings under the impugned SCN are stayed.

---

4. Supreme Court: Email to GST Practitioner Is Valid Service of Notice

Case: Mathur Polymers v. Union of India, SLP (C) Diary No. 50279/2025

Key Principle Reaffirmed

• Notices sent to email addresses registered on the GST portal—even if belonging to the GST Practitioner/CA—constitute valid service under Section 169(1)(c).

Other Findings

• The assessee had concealed receipt of the email; this was adversely noted.

• SC upheld the Delhi HC view that consolidated SCNs may be permissible to demonstrate patterns of evasion.

• The SLP was dismissed with continuation of the ?50,000 cost imposed by the HC.

This ruling strengthens the principle that taxpayers are bound by the contact details they maintain on the portal.

---

5. Himachal Pradesh HC: DGGI Summons Redundant After Jurisdiction Shift to State GST

Case: Prime Steel Industries (P) Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh, CWP 15418/2024

Background

Both DGGI and State GST authorities had initiated inquiries on the same subject matter for FY 2019-20 to 2024-25.

Crucial Facts

• Minutes of a joint meeting recorded agreement that the inquiry would be handled solely by the State GST authority.

• DGGI confirmed that it would not pursue further investigation.

• Records were also transferred to the State authorities.

Court’s Decision

• DGGI summons were rendered redundant and unenforceable.

• Writ petition disposed of accordingly.

• Emphasizes the need to avoid duplicative investigations after jurisdictional clarity.

---

6. Karnataka HC: Ex-Parte Section 73 Order Set Aside Due to Bona Fide Non-Reply

Case: Jothi Polymers (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, WP 26842/2025

Case Overview

• Issue: Excess ITC under Section 73 (no fraud or willful misstatement alleged).

• Assessee responded to pre-intimation notice (ASMT-10) but missed replying to the SCN.

Court’s Reasoning

• Even though the taxpayer did not reply to the SCN, there were bona fide reasons for the lapse.

• Natural justice requires a proper opportunity to be heard.

Outcome

• Ex-parte order quashed.

• Matter remanded to reconsider from the stage of reply submission.

• Reinforces that non-fraud Section 73 proceedings demand liberal, justice-oriented adjudication.

---

7. Gujarat HC: Limitation for GST Appeal Runs from Actual Date of Communication

Case: Keva Fragrances Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, SCA 11799/2025

Facts

• Rectification order uploaded on portal on 01.08.2024.

• Due to portal glitches, it became visible only on 13.11.2024.

• Authorities admitted the glitch.

• Appeal filed on 08.01.2025—within 90 days from actual communication.

Court’s Findings

• Limitation begins from actual communication or knowledge, not the date of portal upload.

• First appellate authority erred in dismissing appeal as time-barred.

Decision

• Rejection order quashed; appeal restored for disposal on merits.

• Important ruling on portal-related procedural fairness.

---

Conclusion

These rulings collectively highlight critical GST law principles:

• Procedural fairness in audits

• Validity of consolidated SCNs

• Constitutional challenges in online gaming taxation

• Proper service of notices

• Avoidance of parallel inquiries

• Liberal approach in non-fraud cases

• Limitation based on real, not theoretical, communication

Taxpayers and practitioners should closely monitor these developments, as they significantly impact GST litigation strategy, compliance posture, and departmental interactions.

"Unlock the Potential of Legal Expertise with LegalMantra.net - Your Trusted Legal Consultancy Partner”

Disclaimer: Every effort has been made to avoid errors or omissions in this material in spite of this, errors may creep in. Any mistake, error or discrepancy noted may be brought to our notice which shall be taken care of in the next edition In no event the author shall be liable for any direct indirect, special or incidental damage resulting from or arising out of or in connection with the use of this information Many sources have been considered including Newspapers, Journals, Bare Acts, Case Materials , Charted Secretary, Research Papers etc

Mayank Garg

LegalMantra.net Team

Print