KISHOR SHRIKRUSHNA DABHADE vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX AND ANR — WP/8288/2025

Case under Central Goods and Services Tax Act,2017 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 22nd April 2026.

CNR: HCBM010219772025

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

WP/14096/2025

Filing Date

17-04-2025

Registration No

WP/8288/2025

Registration Date

23-06-2025

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI , HON'BLE MS JUSTICE AARTI A. SATHE

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI , HON'BLE MS JUSTICE AARTI A. SATHE

Bench Type

Division

Category

INDIRECT TAXES ( 17 )

Sub-Category

GST Goods and Services Tax ( 100 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

22nd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

Central Goods and Services Tax Act,2017 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

KISHOR SHRIKRUSHNA DABHADE

Adv. Aditya Navandar

Respondent(s)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX AND ANR

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI , HON'BLE MS JUSTICE AARTI A. SATHE

29-04-2025

OBJECTIONS TO BE REMOVED

26-06-2025

FOR ORDERS (OBJECTION NOT REMOVED)

11-02-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

22-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION

15-04-2026

HIGH ON BOARD (HOB)

Orders

22-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI,HON'BLE MS JUSTICE AARTI A. SATHE

Summary The Bombay High Court quashed a GST demand order of ₹6,30,86,279 issued against the petitioner for a pre-GST era joint development agreement, finding the tax authority's order was a non-speaking order that failed to consider the petitioner's legal and factual submissions. The court remanded the matter for fresh de novo consideration with directions to issue a new show cause notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned speaking order within three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court quashed a GST demand order of ₹6,30,86,279 issued against the petitioner for a pre-GST era joint development agreement, finding the tax authority's order was a non-speaking order that failed to consider the petitioner's legal and factual submissions. The court remanded the matter for fresh de novo consideration with directions to issue a new show cause notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned speaking order within three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case