Incident Tracker
8 verified incidents · as of 2026-09-05
2026-09-02Other
Vijay Ghanshyam Gadiya v. Union of India, 2026 INSC 947Extending Pooja Ramesh Singh from tribunals to executive adjudicators, the Supreme Court of India set aside a customs penalty order of INR 4.25 billion, and the High Court judgment upholding it, because the order relied on AI-hallucinated precedents. Justice Datta held even an iota of fake material vitiates a decision and left disciplinary action to the officer's appointing authority.
2026-08-20Other
Faiz Enterprise v. State Tax Officer, Unit-67, Surat, R/SCA No. 10123 of 2026 (Gujarat High Court)The High Court of Gujarat quashed a GST registration-cancellation order after finding that the state tax officer had relied on AI-generated, nonexistent and misattributed case law. After the officer admitted using AI, the court laid down verification instructions for all tax officers and warned that future breaches may attract disciplinary action and amount to contempt of court.
2026-07-17Other
Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, W.P.(C) 6049/2026 (Delhi High Court)Two weeks after the Supreme Court of India's Pooja Ramesh Singh ruling, the High Court of Delhi set aside an income-tax appellate order that rested on six nonexistent judgments, calling any order built on fake precedent a nullity and a fraud on the justice system. It remanded and warned that adjudicators citing hallucinated authorities will face disciplinary action.
2026-07-02Other
Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Anr., 2026 INSC 668India's Supreme Court (Justices Narasimha and Aradhe) set aside NCLT and NCLAT orders that had relied on fake, AI-hallucinated precedents, holding a decision resting even partly on fabricated authority is 'no decision in law'. It adopted a zero-tolerance approach, called citing unverified AI cases advocate misconduct, and asked the Bar Council of India to frame rules.
2025-10-06Other
KMG Wires Pvt Ltd v. National Faceless Assessment Centre, WP(L) 24366/2025 (2025:BHC-OS:19789-DB)In India, the Bombay High Court (6 October 2025) quashed a faceless income-tax assessment raising demand on about Rs 27.91 crore because the assessing officer relied on non-existent, AI-generated precedents and ignored the taxpayer's evidence. The court warned quasi-judicial authorities not to blindly trust AI output and remanded the matter for fresh assessment.
2025-09-25Other
Greenopolis Welfare Association v. Narender Singh & Ors, CM(M) 1909/2025In India, the Delhi High Court (25 September 2025) recorded that a petitioner's case relied on judicial precedents that do not exist and on quoted passages absent from real judgments — reported as ChatGPT-generated. Justice Kathpalia allowed the petition to be dismissed as withdrawn after respondents exposed the fabricated, AI-generated citations.
2025-03-24Regulatory referral
Sammaan Capital Ltd v. Mantri Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, CRP No. 49 of 2025In India, the Karnataka High Court (24 March 2025) found that a Bengaluru City Civil Court judge had decided a jurisdiction question by relying on two Supreme Court judgments that were never delivered. Justice Devdas called the conduct disturbing and directed that the order be placed before the Chief Justice for action against the trial judge.
2024-12-30Other
Buckeye Trust v. PCIT-2, Bangalore, ITA No. 1051/Bang/2024In India, the Bengaluru bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal decided a roughly Rs 669 crore private-trust taxation appeal (Buckeye Trust, 30 December 2024) relying in its own reasoning on three non-existent case citations, two attributed to the Supreme Court and one to the Madras High Court. The Tribunal later recalled the order under section 254(2) for fresh hearing.
SafeLegalAIrecords: safelegalai.com/tracker/india · CC BY 4.0