Tax Weekly Round-Up: October 20 - October 26, 2025

SUPREME COURTSupreme Court To Examine If Transfer Of Leasehold Rights Attracts GSTCase no. – Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 52380/2025Case Title – Union Of India & Anr. v. M/S Life Sciences Chemicals & Anr.The Supreme Court is set to examine whether the assignment of leasehold rights constitutes a “transfer of land” or amounts to a “supply of service” under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime.A bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prasanna B. Varale was dealing with Centre's plea challenging a Gujarat High Court judgment that held that assignment of leasehold rights in land and building does not amount to a taxable supply under the GST Act.HIGH COURTSAllahabad HCAllahabad High Court Stays Rs.110 Crore GST Demand On Dabur's Hajmola CandyCase Title: M/S Dabur India Ltd v Union of India and OrsCase Number: WRIT TAX No. - 4709 of 2025The Allahabad High Court on October 10 stayed a ₹110 crore GST show cause notice issued to Dabur India Ltd. over the classification of its Hajmola Candy Tablets.A bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Indrajeet Shukla passed the interim order in a petition filed by Dabur challenging the DGGI notice issued earlier this year.Bombay HCBombay High Court Directs Dept To Pay ₹71.31 Lakh Interest On Refund Of Illegal IGST Collected Under RCM On Ocean FreightCase Title: West India Continental Oils Fats Pvt. Ltd. v. The Union of IndiaCase Number: WRIT PETITION NO. 3000 OF 2023The Bombay High Court has directed the department to pay Rs. 71.31. Lakh interest on refund of illegal IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) collected under RCM (Reverse Charge Mechanism) on ocean freight.Justices M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna stated that admittedly, the Petitioner had paid the amount of IGST which the respondents utilized up to the date of grant of refund. Having utilized such amounts of the Petitioner there is no justification, legal or otherwise to deny interest to the Petitioner. To deprive the Petitioner of interest, in the given facts, would run contrary to the well-recognised legal principle of restitution which also finds statutory force under Section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).Bombay High Court Stays DGFT Notification Changing Classification Of Roasted Areca Nuts; DGFT Issues Fresh NotificationCase Title: Shri. Indu Shekhar v. Union of India & Anr.Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO.5253 OF 2025The Bombay High Court has granted a stay on the Notification issued by the DGFT (Directorate General of Foreign Trade) seeking to alter the classification of “Roasted Areca Nuts”. Subsequently, on 15th October, 2025, the DGFT, having realised the mistake, issued a fresh Notification rectifying the same.Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Amit S. Jamsandekar were addressing a petition seeking a declaration that Notification No.02/2025-26 dated 2nd April 2025, issued by DGFT to alter the classification of “Roasted Areca Nuts”, is ultra vires Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India.Chhattisgarh HCIncome Tax Act | Failure To Raise Timely Objection To Jurisdiction U/S 143(2) Bars Assessee From Challenging Assessment: Chhattisgarh HCCase Title: Harish Kumar Chhabada v. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Income Tax OfficerCase Number: TAXC No. 138 of 2023The Chhattisgarh High Court held that failure to raise a timely objection to jurisdiction under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act bars the assessee from challenging the assessment.Justices Sanjay K. Agrawal and Radhakishan Agrawal stated that the assessee also did not raise any objection regarding jurisdiction upon completion of his assessment. As such, the plea with regard to the territorial jurisdiction of the ITO was barred by virtue of Section 124(3)(a) of the Income Tax Act.Delhi HCDelhi High Court Questions Centre Over Withdrawal Of GST Concession On Vehicles Purchased By Differently-Abled PersonsCase title: All India Confederation Of The Blind (AICB) v. UoICase no.: W.P.(C) 9971/2025The Delhi High Court recently questioned the Central government for effectively withdrawing GST concessions granted to differently-abled persons on purchase of cars. A division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao asked the standing counsel to seek instructions in the matter and respond by December 17.The Court was dealing with a petition moved by All India Confederation Of The Blind (AICB) challenging a notification issued by the Union Ministry of Heavy Industries reducing GST rate on vehicles from 28% to 18%, without granting any special concessions for the differently-abled.Delhi High Court Dismisses Income Tax Dept's Appeals Against Remfry & Sagar Law Firm Over Goodwill License FeesCase title: Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Remfry And SagarCase no.: ITA 525/2025 + ITA 526/2025 + ITA 527/2025 + ITA 528/2025 + ITA 531/2025The Delhi High Court has upheld an order of the ITAT allowing IPR law firm Remfry & Sagar to treat the license fees paid by it to acquire its founder's goodwill, as a business expense ...

Tax Weekly Round-Up: October 20 - October 26, 2025

Kapil Dhyani

Tags