High Court of Gujarat17 July 2026

Vibrant Products v. Union of India

For revenue

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9248 OF 2026

The ruling in brief

Where assessee sought abatement of cess for days preceding installation of additional packing machines, Rule 12(4) was held to operate with reference to total production capacity during a month and not date of installation, thus, challenge to rule was liable to be dismissed with liberty to pursue statutory appeal against order rejecting abatement application

This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.

High Court of Gujarat17 July 2026

Vibrant Products v. Union of India

For revenue

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9248 OF 2026

The ruling in brief

Members

Read the full analysis

The background, the issue before the court and the reasoning behind the decision are free for members — along with the professional discussion on this ruling.

Free to join. No card required.

This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.

Case details

Forum: High Court of Gujarat
Bench: A.S. SUPEHIA AND MS. VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, JJ
Decided on: 17 Jul 2026
Case no.: R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9248 OF 2026
Outcome: In favour of the revenue
Tax area: GST/CESS
Topic: Cess

Allahabad High Court17 Jul 2026

For assessee

Sanchit Seth v. Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise

Arrest for alleged clandestine manufacture and cess evasion would be unlawful where mandatory BNSS safeguards were breached which included defective arrest memo, inconsistent arrest time, absence of family intimation and right-to-counsel recital, post-facto authorization and unsupported evasion quantification; release was ordered

BNSS S.35

Karnataka High Court13 Jul 2026

For assessee

Dhariwal Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

Where pan masala manufacturers using pouch machines were subjected to a monthly machine-wise cess based on maximum rated capacity under a single slab up to 500 pouches per minute, and abatement was restricted to stoppages exceeding fifteen days, such levy disregarded actual production, ignored genuine shorter shutdowns, created arbitrary classifications and was declared unconstitutional being violative of Article 14. GST: Where pan masala manufacturers challenged legislative competence of Health Security se National Security Cess Act, 2025 for levying cess on machines/processes, since taxable event was possession or operation of machines and not supply of goods or services, Parliament had power under Article 246(1) and Entry 97 List I to impose such cess, but manner of execution violated Article 14, rendering Act and Rules void

The ruling in brief

The ruling in brief

Read the full analysis

Related rulings

Sanchit Seth v. Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise

Dhariwal Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

Read the full analysis