GST Case Laws August 2025
The goal of this article is to cover all recent GST case laws August 2025. All latest high court judgments on gst and all the latest Supreme Court judgments on gst issued in August 2025 have been covered in this article. All the latest GST case laws of August 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 Restoration of GST Registration after cancellation for non-filing of returns
Gauhati High Court says GST registration can be restored if pending returns are filed and dues paid, as per proviso to Rule 22(4) of CGST Rules, 2017.
| Gauhati High Court Judgement 2025 |
| Name of case: Mokibur Rahman V/s The Union of India & 3 Ors |
| Date of Judgment: 01-08-2025 |
| Appeal No: WP(C)/4253/2025 |
| Judges: Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi |
| Counsel Name: Respondent – Shri S. C. Keyal, Senior Standing Counsel, CGST |
Fact of the Case: The petitioner, a sole proprietor under “M/s Real Enterprise,” was registered under CGST/AGST Act (Registration No. 18APOPR2233P1Z6). Due to non-filing of GST returns for over six months, a show cause notice was issued on 08.08.2023. The petitioner, not familiar with online procedures, engaged a tax consultant but missed the deadline to reply or attend the hearing. The Superintendent cancelled the GST registration on 14.09.2023 without reasons. Later, the petitioner filed all pending returns up to September 2023, paying taxes, late fees, and interest. However, the revocation application was time-barred. His appeal was dismissed on 24.07.2025, prompting this writ petition seeking restoration. |
| Held by court : The Gauhati High Court held that under the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, if a taxpayer files all pending returns and clears dues, the proceedings for cancellation can be dropped, and GST registration can be restored. Noting the serious civil consequences of cancellation, the Court directed the petitioner to approach the competent authority within two months, complete compliance, and seek restoration. The authority was instructed to consider and decide the application in accordance with law. The Court clarified that the limitation under Section 73(10) will run from the date of this order, except for FY 2024-25, which will be as per Section 44, and all arrears remain payable. |
| In favor of : Assessee |
| Topic of GST : Registration |
| Section of GST: Section 29(2)(c) of CGST Act, 2017, Rule 22(4) of CGST Rules. |
Download PDF of Gauhati High Court Judgement on Mokibur Rahman
GST Case law on Applicability of Section 122(1) and retrospective application of Section 122(1A) of CGST Act.
Supreme Court says Recovery stayed subject to 25% deposit; retrospective application of Section 122(1A) for AY 2017–2020 questioned.
| Supreme Court Judgement 2025 |
| Name of case: Mukesh Kumar Garg V/s Union of India & Ors |
| Date of Judgment: 04-08-2025 |
| Appeal No: SLP (C) No. 18178/2025 |
| Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prasanna B. Varale |
| Counsel Name: Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Sr. Adv. & Ors. for Petitioner; Union of India for Respondent |
Fact of the Case: The petitioner, Mukesh Kumar Garg, challenged the applicability of Section 122(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, arguing that he is a non-taxable person and hence not liable under this section. Further, the petitioner contended that Section 122(1A), introduced w.e.f. 01.01.2021, cannot be applied retrospectively for the assessment years 2017–2020. The Delhi High Court dismissed his writ petition, leading to the filing of this SLP before the Supreme Court. The litigation arose from a GST demand and penalty proceedings initiated by the department, alleging that the petitioner was involved in transactions attracting penal provisions. The core issue revolved around whether these provisions apply to a non-taxable person and if retrospective application is permissible under the GST regime. |
| Held by court : The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and examined the two contentions—first, that Section 122(1) does not apply to the petitioner as a non-taxable person; and second, that Section 122(1A) introduced in 2021 cannot be applied retrospectively to AY 2017–2020. While not deciding on merits, the Court stayed the recovery proceedings, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed demand with the GST Department, either through Electronic Ledger or Cash Ledger. This interim relief ensures the petitioner’s protection from coercive recovery until the matter is finally adjudicated. The Court signaled its willingness to examine the scope and temporal application of Section 122(1A), which could have wider implications for similar cases involving retrospective application of penal provisions. |
| In favor of : Assessee |
| Topic of GST : Penalty & Recovery Proceedings |
| Section of GST: Section 122(1) & Section 122(1A) of CGST Act, 2017 |
Download PDF of Supreme Court Judgement on Mukesh Kumar Garg
