Leading Cases on Taxation: Constitution, Income Tax, GST

Taxation law in India has been shaped as much by the Supreme Court as by Parliament. This note brings together the cases used across the series in three groups: constitutional taxation, income tax, and GST and customs. Each case is placed with the principle examiners expect and the topic where it is discussed in detail.

1. Constitutional Taxation

Figure 1: Cases on taxing power

• Competence. M.P.V. Sundararamier (1958) separated taxing entries from general entries; H.S. Dhillon (1971) placed residuary taxation with Parliament; Mineral Area Development Authority (2024) held royalty is not a tax and upheld State power to tax mineral rights (Topic 3)
• Article 265 and certainty. Moopil Nair (1961) subjected tax laws to Article 14; Mathuram Agrawal (1999) required clarity of subject, person and rate; Mafatlal (1997) linked refund to unjust enrichment (Topic 2)
• Tax, fee and immunities. Shirur Mutt (1954) drew the line between tax and fee; Jindal Stainless (2016) rejected compensatory tax; In re Sea Customs Act (1963) limited Article 289 to taxes on property and income (Topics 4 and 5)
• Interpretation. Dilip Kumar (2018) held that ambiguity in an exemption goes to the Revenue (Topic 7)

2. Income Tax

Figure 2: Cases on income tax

• Income and computation. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy (1957) on agriculture; Sitaldas Tirathdas (1961) on diversion by overriding title; Empire Jute (1980) on capital and revenue expenditure (Topics 10, 12 and 15)
• Avoidance. McDowell (1985), Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003), Vodafone (2012) and Tiger Global (2026) trace the swing between form and substance (Topic 8)
• Procedure. Pooran Mal (1974) on search; Kelvinator (2010) and Rajeev Bansal (2024) on reopening; Malabar Industrial (2000) on revision (Topics 21, 22 and 24)

3. GST and Customs

Figure 3: Cases on GST and customs

• Mohit Minerals (2022). GST Council recommendations are persuasive, not binding; IGST on ocean freight struck down (Topic 26)
• Safari Retreats (2024). A building may be plant under a functionality test for input tax credit; overridden retrospectively by the Finance Act, 2025 (Topic 29)
• Radha Krishan Industries (2021) and Radhika Agarwal (2025). Limits on provisional attachment and on arrest under GST and customs (Topic 31)
• Canon India (2021, review 2024). DRI officers held, on review, to be proper officers for customs demands (Topic 33)

4. Frequently Asked Questions

Which case held that royalty is not a tax?

Mineral Area Development Authority v Steel Authority of India (2024), decided by a nine judge bench by 8 to 1, overruling India Cement (1990).

Is Safari Retreats still good law on input tax credit for buildings?

No. Although the review petition was dismissed, the Finance Act, 2025 amended s.17(5)(d) of the CGST Act with effect from 1 July 2017 to read plant and machinery, removing the basis of the decision.

Which case held that GST Council recommendations are not binding?

Union of India v Mohit Minerals (2022), which treated the recommendations as persuasive, given the simultaneous power of Parliament and the States under Article 246A.

What did Tiger Global (2026) decide?

That a Mauritian tax residence certificate is not conclusive, that grandfathering of pre-2017 investments does not protect arrangements yielding a later tax benefit, and that treaty benefits can be denied on a substance over form analysis.

5. Related Topics

• Topic 3: Distribution of Taxing Powers. Constitutional cases.
• Topic 8: Tax Avoidance, Evasion and GAAR. Avoidance cases.
• Topic 35: Revision Chart. Everything at a glance.