Ankur Kampani v. Union of India & Others
Background
A penalty of Rs. 4,03,26,803/- was imposed on the petitioner vide order dated 15.12.2025 under Sections 122(1)(A), 122(1)(x) and 122(1)(xvi) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017. Crucially, prior to passing of the said order, no notice whatsoever was issued to the petitioner.
Court Observations (Verbatim)
"The impugned order is not only violative of the principles of natural justice but is also in conflict with the provisions of Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Therefore, we have no hesitation in quashing the impugned order qua the petitioner."
Final Verdict
The impugned penalty order was quashed. However, liberty was granted to the respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner in accordance with law.
Other Case Law
Manoja Kumar Nayak vs Commissioner,
Challenge to demand of tax, interest and penalty under Sections 74 & 50 of CGST Act, 2017 despite voluntary reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC). Issue relating to invocation of Section 74 (fraud/suppression) vs Section 73, and levy of interest on reversed
Relevant Facts:The petitioners availed ITC based on invoices issued by a supplie...
Read MoreNational Plasto Moulding v. State of Assam & Ors.
Challenge to denial of Input Tax Credit to purchasing dealers due to default of selling dealers under GST law (Sections involved: Sections 16(2)(c) and 16(2)(d) of CGST Act, 2017 and Assam GST Act, 2017)
Facts :The petitioners, registered dealers under GST, challenged show cause noti...
Read MoreLaxmi Motors vs State of M.P. and Others
Appeal – Limitation for filing appeal under Sections 107(1) and 107(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 – computation of limitation period and exclusion of the first day under Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.
Facts:The petitioner challenged the order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the Appella...
Read More