Case Details: Mayank Bansal vs. Union of India (2026) 43 Centax 238 (Gau.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
-
- Devashis Baruah, J.
- S/Shri A.M. Baruah & B. Raichandani, Advs, for the Petitioner.
- S/Shri S.C. Keyal, Sr. Adv. & K. Jain, Adv., for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioners were partners of a partnership firm engaged in the construction business. A show-cause notice was issued invoking section 122(1A) of the CGST Act. An Order-in-Original imposed a penalty under section 122(1A), and the appeals filed there against were dismissed. The petitioners challenged the penalty on the ground that section 122(1A), which came into force on 01.01.2021, could not be applied to transactions that had taken place prior to its enforcement. The matter was placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that section 122(1A) does not create a new offence but merely identifies the persons liable for penalties arising from violations already punishable under section 122(1). It further held that section 122(1A) is complementary to section 122(1) and operates after adjudication of the violations committed by the taxable person. Accordingly, the question of retrospective operation did not arise, as the only requirement was that the show cause notice invoking section 122(1A) had been issued after the provision came into force. The application of section 122(1A) was therefore held to be valid, and no interference with the penalty was warranted.
List of Cases Cited
-
- Amit Manilal Haria v. Joint Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise — (2026) 40 Centax 100 (Bom.) — Referred [Paras 3, 35, 37, 43]
- Bhupender Kumar v. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North — (2025) 32 Centax 302 (Del.) = 2025 (100) G.S.T.L. 283 (Del.) — Followed [Paras 21, 45, 53]
- Gurudas Mallik Thakur v. Commissioner of Central GST — (2025) 30 Centax 228 (Del.) = 2025 (98) G.S.T.L. 517 (Del.) — Followed [Paras 20, 38]
- Jawala Ram v. State of Pepsu — 1961 SCC OnLine SC 47 — Followed [Para 52]
- Mukesh Kumar Garg v. Union of India — (2025) 30 Centax 370 (Del.) — Referred [Para 47]
- Mukesh Kumar Garg v. Union of India — (2025) 33 Centax 196 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 47]
- Shantanu Sanjay Hundekari v. Union of India — (2024) 17 Centax 18 (Bom.) = 2024 (89) G.S.T.L. 62 (Bom.) — Distinguished [Paras 3, 35, 37]
- Union of India v. Shantanu Sanjay Hundekari — (2025) 27 Centax 14 (S.C.) = 2025 (96) G.S.T.L. 385 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 17]
