TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Provisionally Blocking 10% of Tax Demand Allowed Under Rule 86(A) CGST for Partial Negative Credit Ledger Blocking</h1> <h3>M/s SS CON CAST PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS And DEPUTY DIRECTOR Versus RAMESH KUMAR YADAV</h3> The HC allowed respondents to provisionally block 10% of the tentative demanded tax amount under rule 86(A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, permitting partial ... Jurisdiction - power of respondents u/r 86 (A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 to negatively block the electronic credit ledger whereas the High Courts of Allahabad and Calcutta have held it otherwise - HELD THAT:- The issue requires to be examined at length, however, at this stage, the respondents is allowed to block 10% of the tentative amount of demanded tax, which may be assessed provisionally and unblock the ITC to that extent. List on 10.12.2024. The Punjab & Haryana High Court, through Justices Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Sanjay Vashisth, addressed conflicting High Court rulings regarding the respondents' authority under Rule 86(A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 to negatively block the electronic credit ledger. While Delhi, Gujarat, and Telangana High Courts held no such power exists, Allahabad and Calcutta High Courts upheld it. Citing the Punjab & Haryana High Court's precedent in *K.J. International Vs. State of Punjab* 2023 (12) Centax 106 (P&H), the Court noted that 'negative blocking of the input tax credit ledger beyond 10% of the demand is unjustified,' aligning this limit with the pre-deposit condition under Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act for appeals. The Court provisionally allowed respondents to block only 10% of the tentative tax demand and directed unblocking of ITC accordingly, deferring a detailed examination to a later date. The matter is listed for further hearing on 10.12.2024.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
