GST Case laws May 2025
The goal of this article is to cover all recent GST case laws May 2025. All latest high court judgement on gst and all latest supreme court judgments on gst issued in May 2025 have been covered in this article. All latest GST case laws of May 2025 in this article have been classified by name, date, judge, counsel, GST concept, GST section, etc. In addition, a PDF of the GST case law is provided with the case law so that the user can download it for further study.
GST Case law on Notices Under Section 61
Jharkhand High Court says the notices issued were without jurisdiction and were quashed by the court.
| Jharkhand High Court Judgement 2025 |
| Name of case : Sri Ram Stone Works vs. State of Jharkhand |
| Date of Judgment : 09-05-2025 |
| Appeal No : W.P. (T) Nos. 1239 of 2025 |
| Judges : M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, CJ. AND Deepak Roshan, J. |
| Counsel Name : Sumeet Kumar Gadodia, Mrs. Shilpi Sandil Gadodia, Ranjeet Kushwaha, Ms. Shruti Shekhar, Ms. Sanya Kumari and Ms. Nidhi Lall, |
| Fact of the Case: In this case, the GST officer issued notices under Section 61 of the CGST Act to the petitioners for scrutiny of their returns. However, instead of identifying specific discrepancies in the returns filed, the officer compared the prices at which the petitioners sold stone-boulders or stone-chips with the prevailing market rates. Based on this price comparison, the officer issued show cause notices asking the petitioners to explain why tax recovery proceedings should not be initiated against them. The petitioners challenged these notices through writ petitions, arguing that such action went beyond the scope of scrutiny under Section 61, which is meant only to address discrepancies in filed returns, not to assess pricing decisions. |
| Held by court : Section 61 of the CGST Act is intended to allow the tax officer to scrutinize a taxpayer’s return and point out any discrepancies or errors based on the return and related records. If the taxpayer fails to correct those discrepancies, further action under Sections 65 to 67 or Sections 73/74 may follow. However, in the present case, the officer went beyond this scope by comparing the prices at which the petitioners sold their goods with market prices and issuing notices based on that comparison. This approach was held to be beyond the legal authority granted under Section 61, which does not allow officers to question the pricing of goods unless the transaction is proven to be fake or sham. Simply selling goods at a price lower than the market rate does not give the department the right to treat the difference as taxable. Therefore, the notices issued were without jurisdiction and were quashed by the court. |
| In favor of : Assessee |
| Topic of GST : Assessment |
| Section of GST: Section 61 of CGST Act, 2017 |
GST Case Law on Refund of ITC Accrued Before 18.07.2022 Cannot Be Denied for Late Filing
Supreme Court found no merit in the challenge and dismissed the SLP
| Supreme Court Judgement 2025 |
| Name of case : Assistant Commissioner of Central Taxes vs. Gemini Edibles and Fats India Ltd. |
| Date of Judgment : 09-05-2025 |
| Appeal No : SLP Appeal (C) Nos. 12495-12498 of 2025 |
| Judges : SANJIV KHANNA, CJ. and Sanjay Kumar, J. |
| Counsel Name : Raghavendra P. Shankar, A.S.G., Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR, Karan Lahiri, Ms. Prerna Dhall, Vishnu Shankar Jain and Ajay Jain |
| Fact of the Case: The petitioners were involved in the production and sale of edible oils and specialty fats, where the raw materials they used were taxed at a higher GST rate than the final products. This created an inverted duty structure, allowing them to claim a refund of the unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Section 54 of the CGST Act. They filed refund claims for the period before 18th July 2022. However, the GST Department rejected their claims based on Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST, which interpreted Notification No. 9/2022 dated 13th July 2022 to mean that no refunds could be allowed for any applications filed after 18th July 2022, even if the ITC was accumulated earlier. The High Court held that since the notification clearly stated it was effective only from 18th July 2022, any ITC accumulated before that date was still eligible for refund, regardless of when the application was filed. Therefore, the Court struck down the part of the circular that denied such refunds and set aside the refund rejections made by the department. |
| Held by court : The department challenged the High Court’s decision by filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court found no merit in the challenge and dismissed the SLP. |
| In favor of : Assessee |
| Topic of GST : Refund |
| Section of GST: Section 54 of CGST Act, 2017 |
GST Case law on Cancellation of GST Registration Set Aside Due to Non-Speaking and Unreasoned Order
Gauhati High Court says the cancellation was done without proper reasoning or application of mind; the order was found to be invalid and was therefore set aside and quashed.
| Gauhati High Court Judgement 2025 |
| Name of case : Enling and Co. vs. Union of India |
| Date of Judgment : 01-05-2025 |
| Appeal No : WP(C) No. 1699 OF 2025 |
| Judges : Manish Choudhury, J. |
| Counsel Name : S.K. Agarwal and M. Agarwal |
| Fact of the Case: The assessee’s GST registration was cancelled by the Proper Officer on the ground that returns had not been filed for a continuous period of six months. The assessee argued that she was unable to file a reply to the show cause notice due to circumstances beyond her control. Additionally, she contended that the cancellation order was not a “speaking order,” meaning it did not provide any reasons or justification for the decision. The lack of detailed reasoning made it difficult to understand the basis of the cancellation, which is a violation of the principles of natural justice. |
| Held by court : The cancellation of a GST registration has serious consequences, as it effectively bars the person from carrying out business lawfully under the GST regime. In this case, the Proper Officer cancelled the assessee’s registration without providing any specific reason for the decision. The order did not follow the format and requirements laid down in Form GST REG-19 and lacked any explanation or justification—it was a non-speaking order. Even though the assessee failed to respond to the show cause notice or appear before the officer, the Proper Officer was still legally required to issue a reasoned and well-considered (speaking) order. Since the cancellation was done without proper reasoning or application of mind, the order was found to be invalid and was therefore set aside and quashed. |
| In favor of : Assessee |
| Topic of GST : Registration |
| Section of GST: Section 29 & 39 of CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 21 & 22 of CGST Rules,2017 |
Download PDF of Gauhati High court judgement of Enling and Co.
