Rajkumar Gupta S/O Shri Lt. Shri Laxmi Chand Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court held that the order imposing penalty under Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act was passed on March 30, 2026, for the tax period from April 2019 to October 2022. The Court found that the penalty under Section 122(1A) could not be considered to be applied retrospectively because the tax period under consideration included the period from 2021 up to 2022, which falls after the effective date of the provision (January 1, 2021). Therefore, the contention that the provision was being applied retrospectively to the entire period was rejected. The Court found no case for interference and dismissed the writ petition.
Facts
The petitioner, Rajkumar Gupta, challenged an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax, on March 30, 2026. The order pertained to the tax period from April 2019 to October 2022 and imposed a penalty under Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act. The petitioner contended that Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act is not retrospective and came into force on January 1, 2021, thus it could not be applied for assessment periods prior to 2021. The respondents are the Union of India, the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, and the State of Rajasthan.
Key Issues
1. Whether the provisions of Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act, which came into force on January 1, 2021, can be applied retrospectively to tax periods prior to its commencement? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act is not retrospective and its application is limited to periods after its effective date of January 1, 2021. Therefore, it cannot be applied to tax periods preceding this date. Revenue's contention: The revenue contended that the order imposing penalty under Section 122(1A) was passed on March 30, 2026, for the tax period from April 2019 to October 2022. Since the penalty was imposed for a period that includes the time after January 1, 2021 (specifically, from 2021 up to 2022), it was not being applied retrospectively to the entire period, but rather to the portion of the period that falls within the effective date of the provision.
Sections Cited
Section 122(1A), Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[2026:RJ-JP:22159-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9055/2026 Rajkumar Gupta S/o Shri Lt. Shri Laxmi Chand Gupta, Aged About 57 Years, Resident Of B-10, Major Shaitan Singh Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur Pincode - 302016 ----Petitioner Versus
Union Of India, Through Its Secretary Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance North Block, New Delhi.
Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods And Service Tax, Vkia/c.g.s.t., Division - Vkia Road No. 1D, Vki Area, Jaipur - 302013
State Of Rajasthan, State Of Rajasthan Through Joint Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Government Secretariat, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Khandelwal. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG with Mr. Rohan Mittal & Ms. Chelsi Agarwal. Ms. Anima Chaturvedi Mr. Vedant Agarwal. HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU (THROUGH V.C.) Order 25/05/2026 One of the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that provisions of Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act are not retrospective and have come into force on 1st January 2021 and cannot be applied for the asse
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.