Goods and Services Tax (GST) legislation in India is continuously evolving. Amidst ongoing regulatory adjustments, taxpayers often encounter disputes with tax authorities regarding the interpretation of GST rules. In these situations, GST case laws play a crucial role in shaping how these regulations are implemented, with judicial interventions offering essential clarity. This article explores the progression and impact of ten pivotal GST case laws since the tax regime's inception.

Top GST Court Decisions: An Examination of Key Judgments

1. Gameskraft Case: GST on Online Gaming

Parties involved: Directorate General of GST Intelligence vs. Gameskraft Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Forum: Supreme Court of India (Next hearing 15th July 2025) Key aspects of the case: This high-profile case, still ongoing, centers on the classification and taxation of online gaming services. The dispute began when tax authorities demanded Rs. 21,000 crore in GST from Gameskraft, making it a prominent GST case. The Karnataka High Court initially ruled in favor of Gameskraft, quashing the tax demand. However, the Supreme Court has since stayed the High Court's decision following an appeal by the tax authority. A key contention is whether the online gaming service constitutes a game of skill or chance. Gameskraft argues it is a game of skill, subject to an 18% GST rate. Conversely, the tax authority maintains it is a game of chance, attracting a 28% GST rate under CGST Rule 31A, and that GST should be levied on the total pool value if considered betting, or on the commission if deemed a platform service. The Supreme Court's impending judgment will retrospectively establish the taxation framework for India's entire online gaming sector. Many companies, including Delta Corp and Paytm's First Games, have received GST show-cause notices for alleged tax evasion. The Supreme Court has paused proceedings for all such cases until the final hearing.

2. Bharti Airtel Case: GSTR-3B Revision for ITC Claim

Parties involved: Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. Union of India Forum: Supreme Court of India (Judgement passed on 28th October 2021) Key aspects of the case: This case addressed whether a taxpayer could revise a filed GSTR-3B to claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) for inputs beyond the statutory time limit. The Supreme Court overturned the Delhi High Court's order, denying Bharti Airtel a refund of Rs. 923 crore that resulted from an attempt to rectify GSTR-3B after the legal deadline. The Court emphasized that GSTR-3B rectifications for the period of July to September 2017 are permissible only according to the procedure outlined in CGST Section 39(9) read with CGST Rule 61. It also clarified that taxpayers should not rely solely on auto-generated data from GSTR-2A on the GST portal for discharging liability between July and September 2017. Under the CGST Act, taxpayers are responsible for self-assessing available ITC, verifying eligibility, and balancing electronic cash/credit ledgers independently. A subsequent CGST Circular (26/26/2017-CT dated 29th December 2017) clarified that return rectification could be achieved through adjustments in a later period's return. Consequently, GSTR-3B cannot be revised once filed, as this could have broad implications for other stakeholders' obligations and liabilities.

3. Safari Retreats Case: ITC Eligibility on Rental Commercial Property

Parties involved: Safari Retreats Private Limited vs. Chief Commissioner of CGST Forum: Supreme Court of India (Judgement passed on 3rd October 2024) Key aspects of the case: The Supreme Court affirmed the Odisha High Court's decision, ruling that materials used in the construction of commercial properties intended for renting or leasing are eligible for ITC claims. This contradicts the general ineligibility under CGST Section 19(5)(d) for GST paid on goods and services used in constructing immovable property (excluding plant and machinery) for one's own business use. The Court effectively allowed construction materials for commercial complexes to be interpreted as 'plant and machinery' for ITC purposes. It noted that the term 'plant' in the explanation to CGST Section 17(5) should not be narrowly defined to exclude land, buildings, or other civil structures. The Apex Court advocated for a functionality test to interpret 'plant'. However, the Court clarified that the classification of commercial property as 'plant and machinery' for ITC eligibility must be assessed on a case-by-case basis, considering the registered person's business and the building's role in their operations.

4. B Braun Medical India Case: ITC Denial on Technical Grounds

Parties involved: M/s B Braun Medical India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. Forum: Delhi High Court (Judgement passed on 12th March 2025) Key aspects of the case: The High Court set aside an order that had denied Input Tax Credit, allowing B Braun Medical to claim ITC worth Rs. 5.65 crore during the disputed period. The challenge to the constitutionality of CGST Section 16(2)(aa) was not pursued after this relief was granted. The error in question involved a vendor's invoices mistakenly listing the GSTIN and address of B Braun's Mumbai branch instead of its Delhi unit, despite the goods being delivered to and used by the Delhi unit. The tax officer denied the ITC primarily due to this incorrect GSTIN, despite the genuine nature of the transaction. This case highlighted the High Court's emphasis that tax authorities should prioritize the substance and authenticity of transactions over mere technical discrepancies.

5. VKC Footsteps Case: ITC Refund Restriction under Inverted Duty Structure

Parties involved: Union of India v. VKC Footsteps India Pvt. Ltd. Forum: Supreme Court of India (Judgement passed on 13th September 2021) Key aspects of the case: The Supreme Court reversed earlier high court decisions, affirming the validity of CGST Section 54(3), which permits refunds of accumulated ITC under an inverted tax structure only for purchased goods, not for received services. This ruling confirmed the constitutional validity of CGST Rule 89(5), which excludes input services from its scope. The outcome has significantly impacted sectors such as e-commerce, construction, textiles, and fertilizers, among others, that operate under an inverted tax structure and incur substantial input service costs.

6. Aberdare Technologies Case: Rectification of GSTR-1 & GSTR-3B

Parties involved: Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs vs M/s Aberdare Technologies Private Limited and Ors. Forum: Supreme Court of India (Judgement passed on 24th March 2025) Key aspects of the case: The Supreme Court dismissed a special leave petition filed by the CBIC, ruling that the respondent company should be allowed to correct genuine mistakes to prevent the denial of input tax credit claims. The issue stemmed from CGST Sections 37(3) and 39(9), which impose limitations on error rectifications, leading to significant litigation and compliance burdens for businesses. The Court noted that return timelines should be realistic, as a supplier might only become aware of an error when the purchaser's ITC claim is denied or a tax benefit is withheld. The Apex Court asserted that the right to correct clerical or arithmetical errors is a fundamental aspect of the right to conduct business and should not be denied without compelling and reasonable justification.

7. Allyssum Infra Case: ITC Claims During GST Registration Cancellation Revocation

Parties involved: Allyssum Infra vs Union of India Forum: Gujarat High Court Key aspects of the case: The court permitted the company to seek revocation of its canceled GST registration under Notification No. 3/2023, dated 31st March 2023, which allows taxpayers to apply for reinstatement of registration canceled due to non-filing of returns. Crucially, the court ruled that upon revocation, the petitioner could claim ITC from the date of retroactive cancellation (10th September 2021) until the revocation date, overriding the time limit stipulated under CGST Section 16(4). The ruling directed GST authorities to grant the revocation application and process the ITC application for this