GST INDIA Biz
GST India .biz — Case Law
Latest GST Case Law and Judgements
S.No Name Date of Order Subject Actions
1Ashirwad Food Industries vs Union of India & Ors. 09-02-2026Quantum of deposite- in case alemond reduced in first appeal – GSTAT -Section 112(8) View Download

Case Facts:The petitioner challenged Order-in-Appeal dated 30.06.2025 confirming GST demand along with interest and penalty.Statutory remedy of appeal before GST Appellate Tribunal was available, but the Tribunal was not fully functional.Petitioner had already deposited ₹23.85 lakhs at the first appellate stage against an original demand of about ₹2.38 crores, later reduced to about ₹40 lakhs.The dispute centered on whether further pre-deposit was required for filing appeal before the Tribunal.Court Decision:Court held that no further pre-deposit is required for filing appeal before GSTAT considering earlier deposit of ₹23.85 lakhs.Petitioner permitted to file appeal within four weeks from the date of order.Tribunal directed to decide appeal on merits without considering limitation if filed within the stipulated time.If electronic filing is not possible, petitioner allowed to file appeal physically and same must be accepted without additional pre-deposit.All issues on merits left open for adjudication by the Tribunal.Writ petition disposed of without costs.

Ashirwad Food Industries vs Union of India & Ors. 09-02-2026
Quantum of deposite- in case alemond reduced in first appeal – GSTAT -Section 112(8)

Case Facts:The petitioner challenged Order-in-Appeal dated 30.06.2025 confirming GST demand along with interest and penalty.Statutory remedy of appeal before GST Appellate Tribunal was available, but the Tribunal was not fully functional.Petitioner had already deposited ₹23.85 lakhs at the first appellate stage against an original demand of about ₹2.38 crores, later reduced to about ₹40 lakhs.The dispute centered on whether further pre-deposit was required for filing appeal before the Tribunal.Court Decision:Court held that no further pre-deposit is required for filing appeal before GSTAT considering earlier deposit of ₹23.85 lakhs.Petitioner permitted to file appeal within four weeks from the date of order.Tribunal directed to decide appeal on merits without considering limitation if filed within the stipulated time.If electronic filing is not possible, petitioner allowed to file appeal physically and same must be accepted without additional pre-deposit.All issues on merits left open for adjudication by the Tribunal.Writ petition disposed of without costs.

2R.K. TRANSPORT & CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED v. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.13-06-2025Supplier’s Failure to Deposit GST and State’s Duty to Act under Section 76(2). View Download

BACKGROUNDThe petitioner had obtained commercial vehicle rental/hiring services and paid the invoices along with GST. The tax paid, however, did not appear in the recipient's GSTR-2A because the supplier had not filed GSTR-01. Consequently, the petitioner was unable to utilise the corresponding ITC.Representations were made to the tax authorities requesting action against the supplier for collecting GST without depositing it with the Government. The authorities took the position that the supplier fell within the Central GST jurisdiction and therefore action could not be initiated by the State authorities.COURT OBSERVATIONThe Court held that the stand of the official respondents was contrary to Section 76(1) and (2) of the Jharkhand GST Act. The provision applies to “every person” who collects an amount representing GST and does not pay it to the Government, including a person who is not registered under the JGST Act.The Court further held that the authorities could not refuse action merely because the supplier was registered under the Central GST authorities. The State authorities were under a duty to initiate proceedings under Section 76(2). The Court also rejected the plea of res judicata because the earlier writ petition had not resulted in adjudication on merits.FINAL VERDICTThe writ petition was allowed with costs of ₹1,00,000/- payable by the supplier to the petitioner. The official respondents were directed to initiate proceedings under Section 76 of the Jharkhand GST Act against the supplier for collecting tax and not crediting it to the State Government.

R.K. TRANSPORT & CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED v. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS. 13-06-2025
Supplier’s Failure to Deposit GST and State’s Duty to Act under Section 76(2).

BACKGROUNDThe petitioner had obtained commercial vehicle rental/hiring services and paid the invoices along with GST. The tax paid, however, did not appear in the recipient's GSTR-2A because the supplier had not filed GSTR-01. Consequently, the petitioner was unable to utilise the corresponding ITC.Representations were made to the tax authorities requesting action against the supplier for collecting GST without depositing it with the Government. The authorities took the position that the supplier fell within the Central GST jurisdiction and therefore action could not be initiated by the State authorities.COURT OBSERVATIONThe Court held that the stand of the official respondents was contrary to Section 76(1) and (2) of the Jharkhand GST Act. The provision applies to “every person” who collects an amount representing GST and does not pay it to the Government, including a person who is not registered under the JGST Act.The Court further held that the authorities could not refuse action merely because the supplier was registered under the Central GST authorities. The State authorities were under a duty to initiate proceedings under Section 76(2). The Court also rejected the plea of res judicata because the earlier writ petition had not resulted in adjudication on merits.FINAL VERDICTThe writ petition was allowed with costs of ₹1,00,000/- payable by the supplier to the petitioner. The official respondents were directed to initiate proceedings under Section 76 of the Jharkhand GST Act against the supplier for collecting tax and not crediting it to the State Government.

Total: 2 case laws