Skip to content

Part-3-One Pager Snapshot of Round up of Latest GST Cases..

Judgements serve as a benchmark in interpreting a provision..This round up is not an alternative to detailed reading of judgement but aimed to provide a snapshot so that one may refer detailed decision, if required..

s. no

Section

Case Subject

Case

Held

Cases Referred

1

Chapter 44

Classification of Wooden ice cream sticks and wooden ice cream spoons

Ragu Packaging [2023] 149 taxmann.com 446 (AAR-KARNATAKA)

Wooden ice cream sticks and wooden ice cream spoons are classifiable under Heading No. 44199090 as Tableware and Kitchenware of Wood and not under 44219190 as articles of wood

-

2

Section 69 and Section 132

Pre-condition of deposit of an amount or furnishing a bank guarantee for grant of bail

Makhijani Pushpak Harish v. State of Gujarat [2023] 149 taxmann.com 445 (SC)

Hon’ble Apex Court observed that pre-condition of deposit of an amount or furnishing a bank guarantee for grant of bail has been held to be bad in number of cases. The Court was of the considered opinion that pre-condition of furnishing bank guarantee imposed by the High Court is not liable to be sustained and thus set aside.

-Criminal Appeal No. 186/2023, Subhash Chouhan Vs. Union of India, this Court


-Criminal Appeal No. 523/2023, Anatbhai Ashokbhai Shah Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors

3

Section 29

Cancellation of Registration without proper opportunity being given and petitioners bonafide of business history

Ummer Farooq v. Superintendent of Central Tax [2023] 149 taxmann.com 443 (Karnataka)

The High Court observing the lack of opportunity and petitioner's bonafide like business history of over twenty-one years with good business practices, quashed the impugned order of cancellation of GST registration and restored the proceedings for reconsideration.

-

4

Section 69 and Section 132

Grant of Bail

Mohammed Ali Akram Khan v. Union of India [2023] 149 taxmann.com 442 (Rajasthan)

It was observed by the High Court that the petitioner had
evaded tax and got benefit of input tax credit of nearing
Rs.88.33 Crores. It also took note of decisions of Hon’ble
Apex Court wherein it was held that economic offenders
should not be dealt as a general offender and while
granting bail to Vinay Kant Ameta, hon’ble apex court
directed him to deposit Rs.200 Crores. The High Court thus,
enlarged the petitioner on bail with a condition to deposit
Rs.5 Crores by the petitioner before the respondent
Department ‘under protest’.

It was observed by the High Court that the petitioner had
evaded tax and got benefit of input tax credit of nearing
Rs.88.33 Crores. It also took note of decisions of Hon’ble
Apex Court wherein it was held that economic offenders
should not be dealt as a general offender and while
granting bail to Vinay Kant Ameta, hon’ble apex court
directed him to deposit Rs.200 Crores. The High Court thus,
enlarged the petitioner on bail with a condition to deposit
Rs.5 Crores by the petitioner before the respondent
Department ‘under protest’.