The Delhi High Court has ordered authorities across the country to implement biometric-based Aadhaar authentication for all new GST registrations to prevent fraudulent registrations using stolen PAN and Aadhaar information, which result in substantial revenue losses and harassment for innocent individuals.

The Court has also asked the authorities to examine suggestions such as facial recognition of the applicant with the Aadhaar database and video-based verification of the PAN and Aadhaar. 

The Division Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Shail Jain directed, "Hence, for the time being, directions are issued to all the authorities across the country not to allow any GST Registration without biometric based AADHAR authentication henceforth. Liberty is granted to the authorities to file objections qua any practical difficulty in its implementation."


Advocate Manoj Kumar appeared for the Petitioner, while CGSC Radhika Arora appeared for the Respondents

A writ petition was filed alleging fraudulent GST registration by some other person by using the PAN Card and Aadhaar Card numbers of the Petitioner. 

The Respondents submitted that biometric based AADHAR Authentication is carried out only if the system identifies the case as ‘risky’ on the basis of various parameters and data analytics.

The Court also noted that it was disclosed in the Rajya Sabha that in the year 2023-2024 there were 2800 fraudulent GST Registrations obtained by using stolen or frozen PAN/ AADHAR details, involving detection of Rs.15,085 crore of tax evasion.

It was further noted that in the year 2024-2025, the number of fraudulent GST registrations was 1654 and tax evasion of Rs.13109 Crores was detected. It was disclosed that biometric Aadhaar-based authentication has been made mandatory for GST Registration.

"It appears that despite passage of more than one year, the statement given by the minister on the floor of the house has not been fully implemented, resulting in continuous fake GST Registration obtained using stolen or frozen PAN/ AADHAR details", the Court observed. 

The Court, therefore, asked the competent authorities to rise to the situation, which is resulting in the loss of revenue to the government and harassment of innocents. 

The Court also asked the authorities to examine the suggestions given by Senior Advocate Tarun Gulati.

These suggestions are as follows:

1. Facial recognition of the applicant with the Aadhaar database;

2. Video-based verification of the PAN and Aadhaar should be made mandatory;

3. The IP address and device location used at the time of filing the application should be recorded and preserved by the GST common portal as well as the jurisdictional authority sanctioning the application and granting GST registration;

4. Mandatory physical verification of the proposed principal place of business should be undertaken by the GST Department before the grant of registration, rather than such verification being confined to cases flagged as high-risk by the existing risk- unalytics engine;

5. Real-time sharing of data with the Income Tax Department, which shall also, in real time, send a message and email to the PAN holder that his/her PAN has been used for GST registration;

6. For a sudden and significant increase in turnover, the system should flag the registration under the potentially suspected category;

7. Real-time cross-check with the Aadhaar holder confirming that the applicant has actual knowledge of the business/ PPOB being registered under his Aadhaar;

8. Sending a message to DigiLocker informing that the PAN/Aadhaar number has been used for GST registration and obtaining consent confirmation;

9. Directorate General of Analytics and Risk Management can create a specific PAN-Aadhaar mismatch and "first time use of PAN/Aadhaar for GST" risk parameter; and

10. While applying for a GSTIN, the applicant may be required to nominate one or more identifiable persons such as business associates, employees, partners, or family members who can corroborate the applicant's identity and the existence of the proposed business.

Accordingly, the matter is listed on September 22, 2026, for further consideration.

Cause Title: Neha v. Union of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) 12210/2026 and CM APPL. 56533/2026]

Appearances:

Petitioner: Advocate Manoj Kumar, Advocate Ankit Singh, Advocate Vaibhav Bhardwaj, Advocate Chanderpal, Advocate Nikhil Pramod, Advocate Animesh Gaur, Advocate Satya Shruti

Respondents: Central Government Standing Counsel Radhika Arora, Central Government Standing Counsel Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, Senior Standing Counsel (CBIC) Shubham Tyagi, Standing Counsel Ankit Raj, Government Pleader Disha Choudhary, Government Pleader Disha Chaudhary, Advocate Sumit K. Batra, Advocate Priyanka Jindal, Advocate Saurabh Mishra, Advocate Digvijay Singh, Advocate Gurleen Kaur Waraich, Advocate Kritarth Upadhyay, Advocate Vivek Sharma, Advocate Amulya Dev Mishra, Advocate Saksham Sharma, Advocate Navruti Ojha, Assistant Commissioner of Police Virender Kalyan, Inspector Ramkesh, Sub-Inspector Navneen Kumar

Click here to read/download the Order


Tags: