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
The State (NCT) of Delhi vs. Khimji Bhai Jadeja
Clubbing of FIRs / Same Transaction – Sections 218, 219, 220 & 223 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Sections 420 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Facts:An FIR was registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Delhi Police alleging...
Read MoreNHD Motors vs. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Validity of demand order passed ex-parte under Section 73 of Delhi GST Act, 2017 where SCN was uploaded only on the obscure 'Additional Notices Tab' of the GST portal, denying the assessee an effective opportunity of hearing.
BackgroundNHD Motors, a GST-registered partnership firm, was issued an SCN dated...
Read MoreTHE COMMISSIONER, CGST & CX, KOLKATA NORTH COMMISSIONERATE v. POWER TECH GLOBAL PRIVATE LIMITED
Reversal of ITC under Section 17(2) read with Rules 42 and 43 of the CGST Rules and retrospective applicability of Notification No. 14/2022. Whether Section 74(1) could be invoked in the absence of established fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression, an
BACKGROUNDThe adjudicating authority directed reversal of proportionate ITC attr...
Read More