GST INDIA Biz
GST India .biz — Case Law Details
Detailed GST Case Law Information

A. M. Marketplaces Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India & Ors.

Date of Order: January 17, 2026
Case Law No: GIB-BHC-NAG-2026-05-DB
Subject: Demand and adjudication – Minimum time gap between issuance of notice and passing of order under Sections 73(2) and 73(10) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Description:

Facts:
The petitioner challenged the show cause notice dated 18.11.2024 and the adjudication order dated 31.01.2025 passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act. The contention of the petitioner was that the final order had been passed within less than three months from the issuance of the notice, contrary to the requirement under Sections 73(2) and 73(10) of the CGST Act.

Court Decision:
The Court held that Section 73(2) requires issuance of the notice at least three months prior to the outer time limit for passing the order under Section 73(10), and this period ensures that the assessee gets meaningful opportunity to file reply, seek personal hearing and avail the statutory options under Section 73 such as payment within thirty days.

The Court held that maintaining a minimum gap of three months between issuance of notice and passing of the final order is mandatory. Since the notice was issued on 18.11.2024 and the final order was passed on 31.01.2025, the gap was only about two months and thirteen days. The show cause notice and the order were therefore quashed and the matter was remanded to the authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

Cases Referred by Court:

·         C.H. Robinson Worldwide Freight India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner, CGST-Delhi-South & Ors., W.P.(C) 15508/2024, Delhi High Court, Order dated 29.10.2025

·         Tata Play Limited v. Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, W.P.(C) 4781/2025, Delhi High Court

·         The Cotton Corporation of India v. Assistant Commissioner (ST Auditfac) & Ors., Writ Petition No.1463 of 2025, Andhra Pradesh High Court, Order dated 05.02.2025

Other Case Law

M.S. STEELS v. THE COMMISSIONER OF KERALA STATE GST

Whether penalty under Section 129 of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017 is leviable on internal stock transfer without an e-way bill. Applicability of Sections 7, 9, 68 and 129 read with Rule 138(1)(ii) to movement between premises of the same registered person.

BACKGROUNDGoods were transported from one registered premises to another registe...

Read More
Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore vs. M/s. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd.

Classification of goods and retrospective applicability of CBEC circular – Section 37B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – Classification under Heading 8535 vs 8537 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

Facts:The assessee manufactured Single Panel Circuit Breakers and classified the...

Read More
Sharp Tanks and Structurals Private Limited vs The Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals) & Another

Appeal – Limitation for filing appeal under Section 107 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 – whether uploading of order on GST portal amounts to communication for the purpose of limitation – Sections 107 and 169 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 1

Facts:The petitioner, a registered assessee, was subjected to inspection and sho...

Read More