TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
It is really a matter of cause of great concern that day in and day out, numerous orders are being passed by various jurisdictional high courts across India either setting aside or even quashing the orders be it OIO or OIA. It is highly unfortunate that neither the officer passing the order nor a senior officer at the rank of Commissioner of the respective jurisdiction seems to be serious about this happening. Even the CBIC as well as GST council seems to be insensitive as it seems that these decisions of various higher courts quashing orders under GST law are not only simply continuing but seems as if the cases are on the increasing trend.
The finance minister is proud to have a larger registered persons during 2025 as compared with the initial period of 2017, whereas the fact remains that a major portion of these registered persons are small and medium enterprises whose turnover is less than INR Two Crores per annum. These taxpayers are not comfortable to knock the doors of the jurisdictional high courts by way of writs for demands amounting to less than one lakhs as they have to weigh the cost benefit analysis of preferring the writ.
I would like to bring the notice of all concerned that a small taxpayer based at a remote location in Virudunagar District of Tamilnadu was forced to approach the jurisdictional high court for setting aside a duplicate demand of INR 68,025 which is apparent from the order dated 22/01/2026 as reported in M/s. Sri Velavan Fireworks Represented by its Partner N. Gandheeswaran Versus The commercial Tax Officer, Sivakasi - 2026 (1) TMI 1434 - MADRAS HIGH COURT It is a clear case of duplicate demand which was set aside only after the intervention of High Court, whereas the fact remains that each and every taxpayer is not in a position to file a writ when the GST demand is raised illegally.
In this article four more recent decisions of various high courts are analyzed to spread the message contained in the first para above to all connected persons. This series will continue till such time there is some significant improvement by way of reduction in number of orders being quashed at a later date by a higher court or GSTAT.
Case law 1: Vide order dated 09/01/2026, the Bombay High court has held in para 15 that the writ petition is accordingly allowed and SCN dated 20/12/2024 is quashed and set aside. Para 16 reads as Rule is made absolute in above terms as reported in Aerocom Cushions Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner (Anti-Evasion), CGST & CX, Nagpur-1, Superintendent, CGST & Central Excise, Anti – Evasion, Nagpur. - 2026 (1) TMI 701 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Case law 2: The Karnataka High Court vide order dated 12/01/2026 held in operative portion that petition is allowed and order dated 16/03/2022 is set aside as reported in M/s. Amigo Vending Machines Versus The Union of India, Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, Bangalore - 2026 (1) TMI 1141 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT.
Case Law 3: The Gujarat High court has vide order dated 16/01/2026 ruled that the impugned orders dated 09/01/2024, summary order dated 15/04/2024 as well as appeal order dated 12/03/2025 are all hereby quashed and set aside as reported in M/s. R.P. Chemicals Through Partner Atulkumar Jivanlal Padia Versus Superintendent CGST And Central Excise & Anr. - 2026 (1) TMI 1143 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT. Incidentally, the error in first two orders were endorsed as correct by first appellate authority. GST Council may consider the possibilities to amend CGST Act by deleting Section 107 on first appeal as it saves time and money as well as efforts of both taxpayers as well as tax professionals, unless the mindset of the first appellate authority changes now as GSTAT is in place.
Case Law 4: The Calcutta High court ruled on 19/01/2026 in para 24 of the order that for all the reasons aforesaid, the order in original cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the OIO dated 30/01/2025 stands set aside as reported in Sunrise Timply Company Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India & Ors. - 2026 (1) TMI 1149 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT.
Out of all the above five cases, I am not connected in any manner except that I constantly update my knowledge on a daily basis by going through all the recent pronouncements. If I am perturbed by these verdicts by setting aside or quashing orders passed by a GST official, I wonder as to how the connected GST officials would also be perturbed.