UltraTech Cement Faces Rs 46 Cr GST Demand, Plans Appeal Against Maharashtra Tax Order:

UltraTech Cement Limited has received a Rs 46 crore GST demand from Maharashtra authorities over alleged ITC irregularities for FY23 and plans to challenge the order.
GST Authorities Raise Rs 46 Cr Demand on UltraTech Cement

UltraTech Cement Faces Rs 46 Cr GST Demand, Plans Appeal Against Maharashtra Tax Order
UltraTech Cement Limited has informed the stock exchange that it has received an order in original passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax, Maharashtra, confirming a tax demand amounting to Rs 28.96 crore, along with interest of Rs 15.00 crore and a penalty of Rs 2.89 crore.
The company had received the said communication on March 24, 2026. According to the GST authority, there were irregularities in the input tax credit (ITC) claimed by the company during the financial year 2022-23 (assessment year 2023-24). These include alleged excess ITC availed, ineligible ITC claims, and short payment of tax liability.
The company believes that the said order is not justified and will challenge the same before the appropriate appellate authority. The company does not expect that the present action will have any impact on its financial, operational, and other activities.
The company has made the aforementioned disclosure through a regulatory filing dated March 25, 2026, addressed to the National Stock Exchange (NSE) and Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), issued under Regulation 30 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015.
Significant Details of Communication
| Particulars | Details |
| Company's Name | UltraTech Cement Limited |
| Issuing Authority | Deputy Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax, Maharashtra |
| Assessment Year | 2023-24 |
| Demand Raised | Rs 28.96 Crore, along with interest of Rs 15.00 Crore and penalty of Rs 2.89 Crore |
| Date of Receipt of Order | 24-Mar-26 |
| Impact on Financial, Operational and Other Activities | Not Expected |
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2622My Recent Articles
- Mere Expense Disallowance Cannot Trigger Section 271(1)(c) Penalty; ITAT Partly Allows AppealPremium
- ROC: Company and Directors Faces Penalty for Not Having Any Office at Registered Location of BusinessPremium
- ROC Imposes Penalty on Company and Director for Failure to Furnish Financial Statements for FY 2021-22
- ICSI Seeks Further Extension of CCFS 2026 Beyond August 31 Amid Technical Issues on MCA-21 Portal
- ICSI Submits Follow-Up Representation to MCA, Seeks Resolution of 17 Key Issues to Improve MCA-21 Compliance
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts
All Posts
Recent Posts
All Posts







