GST INDIA Biz
GST India .biz — Case Law
Latest GST Case Law and Judgements
S.No Name Date of Order Subject Actions
1Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations v. Commissioner, CGST Delhi East & Ors.31-08-2026GST on affiliation fees and annual or late registration charges collected by CISCE from schools – exemption under Entry 66(b)(iv) of Notification 12/2017-CT(R), validity of a consolidated SCN, Section 74 and cum-tax value. View Download

BackgroundFollowing an anti-evasion inspection, a consolidated SCN for July 2017–November 2023 demanded GST of about Rs. 20.90 crore on affiliation, registration, documentation, licence and late fees, invoking Section 74 for July 2017–August 2018. The first appellate authority dropped documentation charges, late entry fees and licence fees, and regularised affiliation fees up to 17.06.2021 under Circular 234/28/2024-GST. It upheld tax on affiliation fees after 18.06.2021 and on annual and late registration charges for the whole period, with Section 74 and penalties. Eight issues were framed in CISCE’s appeal.Final VerdictThe Tribunal held that a consolidated SCN covering several years is not invalid without demonstrable prejudice. Applying Dilip Kumar & Co. (strict construction of exemptions) and distinguishing High Court rulings on statutory universities, since CISCE is a registered society, it held that affiliation, including processing and form charges, is an independent taxable supply and not a service “relating to admission to, or conduct of examination” under Entry 66(b)(iv). Annual and late registration charges were likewise held taxable and outside the regularisation in Circular 234/28/2024-GST, whose challenge was rejected.In CISCE’s favour, it held that since no tax was separately collected, the amounts received must be treated as cum-tax under Rule 35, and that, the respondent having called for and received details in 2023, fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression was not established. The demand for July 2017–August 2018 (Rs. 1,29,60,720) was therefore set aside as time-barred, together with its interest and penalty. Demands for September 2018–November 2023 were upheld with Section 73 penalty and the Section 125 penalty of Rs. 25,000, no penalty or interest was to apply to the regularised affiliation period, and the liability was ordered to be recomputed. The outcome is neutral: the levy was upheld, but with substantial relief.

Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations v. Commissioner, CGST Delhi East & Ors. 31-08-2026
GST on affiliation fees and annual or late registration charges collected by CISCE from schools – exemption under Entry 66(b)(iv) of Notification 12/2017-CT(R), validity of a consolidated SCN, Section 74 and cum-tax value.

BackgroundFollowing an anti-evasion inspection, a consolidated SCN for July 2017–November 2023 demanded GST of about Rs. 20.90 crore on affiliation, registration, documentation, licence and late fees, invoking Section 74 for July 2017–August 2018. The first appellate authority dropped documentation charges, late entry fees and licence fees, and regularised affiliation fees up to 17.06.2021 under Circular 234/28/2024-GST. It upheld tax on affiliation fees after 18.06.2021 and on annual and late registration charges for the whole period, with Section 74 and penalties. Eight issues were framed in CISCE’s appeal.Final VerdictThe Tribunal held that a consolidated SCN covering several years is not invalid without demonstrable prejudice. Applying Dilip Kumar & Co. (strict construction of exemptions) and distinguishing High Court rulings on statutory universities, since CISCE is a registered society, it held that affiliation, including processing and form charges, is an independent taxable supply and not a service “relating to admission to, or conduct of examination” under Entry 66(b)(iv). Annual and late registration charges were likewise held taxable and outside the regularisation in Circular 234/28/2024-GST, whose challenge was rejected.In CISCE’s favour, it held that since no tax was separately collected, the amounts received must be treated as cum-tax under Rule 35, and that, the respondent having called for and received details in 2023, fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression was not established. The demand for July 2017–August 2018 (Rs. 1,29,60,720) was therefore set aside as time-barred, together with its interest and penalty. Demands for September 2018–November 2023 were upheld with Section 73 penalty and the Section 125 penalty of Rs. 25,000, no penalty or interest was to apply to the regularised affiliation period, and the liability was ordered to be recomputed. The outcome is neutral: the levy was upheld, but with substantial relief.

2VISHAL CHAUDHARY v. DIRECTOR, BANGLA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED14-08-2026Jurisdiction of GSTAT in appeals involving OIDAR services under Section 109(5) of the CGST Act read with Section 14 of the IGST Act. Whether such appeals fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Principal Bench pursuant to Notification No. S.O. 421 View Download

BACKGROUNDThe appeal arose from an order concerning alleged non-payment of IGST under reverse charge in respect of OIDAR services received from a supplier located outside India. The First Appellate Authority had dropped the demand, and the Revenue challenged that decision before the Tribunal.During hearing, both sides pointed out that the matter involved OIDAR services and therefore raised a question regarding the jurisdiction of the State Bench vis-à-vis the Principal Bench.COURT OBSERVATIONThe Tribunal examined Section 109(5) of the CGST Act, which provides for exclusive Principal Bench jurisdiction where the issue involves place of supply, together with the notification issued on 17.09.2025. It noted that Section 14 of the IGST Act specifically deals with OIDAR services.The Tribunal held that appeals involving OIDAR services fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Principal Bench, GSTAT, New Delhi, and that the State Bench therefore had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.FINAL VERDICTThe Registry was directed to transfer the appeal along with the complete record to the Principal Bench, GSTAT, New Delhi, for disposal in accordance with law. The parties were directed to appear before the Registrar of the Principal Bench on 21.08.2026. 

VISHAL CHAUDHARY v. DIRECTOR, BANGLA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED 14-08-2026
Jurisdiction of GSTAT in appeals involving OIDAR services under Section 109(5) of the CGST Act read with Section 14 of the IGST Act. Whether such appeals fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Principal Bench pursuant to Notification No. S.O. 421

BACKGROUNDThe appeal arose from an order concerning alleged non-payment of IGST under reverse charge in respect of OIDAR services received from a supplier located outside India. The First Appellate Authority had dropped the demand, and the Revenue challenged that decision before the Tribunal.During hearing, both sides pointed out that the matter involved OIDAR services and therefore raised a question regarding the jurisdiction of the State Bench vis-à-vis the Principal Bench.COURT OBSERVATIONThe Tribunal examined Section 109(5) of the CGST Act, which provides for exclusive Principal Bench jurisdiction where the issue involves place of supply, together with the notification issued on 17.09.2025. It noted that Section 14 of the IGST Act specifically deals with OIDAR services.The Tribunal held that appeals involving OIDAR services fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Principal Bench, GSTAT, New Delhi, and that the State Bench therefore had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.FINAL VERDICTThe Registry was directed to transfer the appeal along with the complete record to the Principal Bench, GSTAT, New Delhi, for disposal in accordance with law. The parties were directed to appear before the Registrar of the Principal Bench on 21.08.2026. 

Total: 2 case laws