The Delhi High Court has directed that no fresh GST registration should be granted anywhere in the country without biometric Aadhaar authentication.
The direction was issued on 10 September 2026 by a Division Bench of Justice Anil Khetarpal and Justice Shail Jain in Neha v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 12210/2026 — a petition arising out of fraudulent GST registrations obtained by misusing the PAN and Aadhaar details of people who had no idea their identity documents were being used at all.
What the Court directed
The Bench directed GST authorities across the country to ensure that there is no fresh GST registration without biometric-based Aadhaar authentication, henceforth.
Two features of the order are worth noting.
First, the Court recorded that counsel appearing for the authorities could not identify any practical difficulty in implementing the requirement. That absence of a stated obstacle is what the direction rests on.
Second, the Bench observed that a statement made by the Minister on the floor of the House had not been fully implemented despite the passage of more than a year. The order is, in that sense, less an innovation than an instruction to complete something already announced.
The Court also asked the authorities to consider the measures suggested by Senior Advocate Tarun Gulati to prevent the misuse of PAN and Aadhaar for fraudulent registrations, and gave them liberty to place any practical difficulties before the Court.
The numbers behind the order
The petition placed government data before the Court on the scale of the problem.
| Year | Fraudulent Registrations Detected | Tax Evasion Involved |
|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | 2,800 | ₹15,085 crore |
| 2024-25 | 1,654 | ₹13,109 crore |
The pattern behind those figures is consistent. A registration is obtained using somebody else’s identity documents, invoices are issued without any underlying supply, input tax credit is passed on down a chain of recipients, and the registration disappears before anything is recovered. The person whose PAN and Aadhaar were used is often the last to find out, typically when a notice arrives for a business they have never heard of.
What was already in place
Biometric authentication is not a new concept in GST registration. Rule 8 of the CGST Rules, 2017 already provides for biometric-based Aadhaar authentication, together with the taking of a photograph and verification of the original documents, for applicants identified on the common portal by reference to data analysis and risk parameters.
What has distinguished the rollout so far is that it has been State by State. GSTN has issued a series of advisories extending the facility to applicants in particular States and Union Territories in phases, with appointments booked at a designated GST Suvidha Kendra. We have covered one such step, on biometric authentication in the home State for an applicant seeking registration in another State.
The effect of the Court’s direction is to move the requirement from a phased, risk-flagged rollout towards a uniform national position for fresh registrations.
What changes in practice
For anyone applying for a new GST registration, the practical consequences are straightforward.
Biometric authentication becomes part of the application, not an exception to it. Where previously an applicant might or might not be flagged for biometric verification depending on the State and the risk parameters, the direction contemplates it applying to fresh registrations generally.
A physical visit is involved. Biometric authentication under this process is done in person at a designated centre, with the original documents and a photograph. It cannot be completed entirely online.
Timelines will move. An application that requires an appointment, a visit and verification takes longer than one cleared on the portal. Businesses planning a new registration — a new branch, a new State, a new entity — should build that into their schedule rather than assume the earlier timeline. The wider sequence is set out in our note on the GST registration process.
Authorised signatory details matter more. Because the authentication attaches to a person, the identity and availability of the authorised signatory becomes a gating item in the application rather than a form field.
What the order does not decide
This is where most coverage of the order stops short, and it is worth being precise.
It is an interim direction in a pending petition, not a final judgment. The writ remains listed, and the authorities have express liberty to place practical difficulties before the Court.
It speaks to fresh registrations. The direction, as reported, is framed around registrations granted henceforth. It does not, on its face, deal with existing registrations, and nothing in the reported order suggests that registrations already granted are disturbed.
It does not alter the grounds for cancellation or suspension. Those continue to be governed by the statute and the rules, and are a separate question from how a registration is obtained. Our note on reasons a GST registration is cancelled deals with that.
The implementation detail is not in the order. How the requirement is operationalised — capacity at verification centres, appointment availability, treatment of applicants outside India, and what happens where biometric authentication genuinely fails — will be worked out administratively, and is the kind of thing that liberty to report difficulties is designed to address.
What applicants should do now
Four practical steps, none of which depends on how the matter develops.
Identify the authorised signatory early, and confirm that person’s Aadhaar is linked to a current mobile number. A mismatch here stalls the application before it starts.
Assume a physical verification step when planning a new registration, and build in the time.
Keep original documents ready — constitution of business, principal place of business proof, identity documents — in the form required at the centre rather than only as portal uploads.
Watch the GSTN advisories for your State. The portal advisory, not general news coverage, is what tells you the operative process on the day you apply.
What happens on 22 September
The matter is listed again on 22 September 2026. What to watch for: whether the authorities report any practical difficulty, what they say about implementation capacity, and whether the Court’s consideration of the measures suggested to prevent PAN and Aadhaar misuse produces anything further.
Until then, the position for a fresh application is the direction as issued, read together with the advisory in force for the relevant State.
