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

Md Qamaruddin Khan v. M/s YRK Constructions, Hyderabad

Date of Order: September 17, 2026
Case Law No: GIB-GSTAT-2026-121
Subject: Whether the appellate authority could revoke cancellation of registration on verification of returns and tax alone, without ensuring payment of interest, late fee and penalty under the proviso to Rule 23(1).
Description:

Background

The respondent’s registration was cancelled from 12.11.2020 for not filing GSTR-3B for six months. Finding that all returns had been filed after the show cause notice, the First Appellate Authority revoked the cancellation and directed the proper officer to verify the filing of returns and payment of tax. The department appealed, contending that interest, late fee and penalty also had to be paid under Rule 23(1). The respondent did not appear despite three opportunities.

Final Verdict

The Tribunal held that the liability under returns extends to interest, late fee and penalty, and that by not applying the proviso to Rule 23(1), the First Appellate Authority committed a jurisdictional and substantive error. It also observed that admitted dues are recoverable through Section 79, which the department ought to invoke before seeking the Tribunal’s aid for collection. Reading the appellate order as intending recovery of the Rule 23 amounts, it held that the department was free to collect interest under Section 50 and late fee under Section 47, and imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000 under Rule 23, modifying the order to that extent. Since the revocation of cancellation was left intact and only ancillary dues and penalty were added, the outcome is neutral (partly in favour of each side).

Other Case Law

The Joint Commissioner, Central Tax & Central Excise & Ors. v. Nishad K.U.

Whether the right to cross-examine witnesses whose statements are recorded and relied upon by the proper officer is an integral part of the principles of natural justice mandatorily applicable in adjudication proceedings under Section 74(9) of the CGST Ac

BackgroundThe Respondent-assessee was subjected to proceedings under Section 74(...

Read More
Dow Chemical International Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of State Tax,

Whether procurement services by a Swiss group hub (Dow Europe GmbH) to its Indian affiliate are “intermediary services” with place of supply outside India, entitling refund of IGST paid under RCM as import of services.

BackgroundUnder a Procurement Agreement of 01.07.2021, Dow Europe, the group’s...

Read More
Metal N Strips vs. Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeals-3) & Anr.

Penalty exceeding amount specified in show cause notice – Sections 74(1), 74(9), 75(7), 75(13) and Section 122(1)(vii) of the CGST Act / KGST Act, 2017.

Facts:The petitioner challenged the adjudication order dated 30.06.2023 passed u...

Read More