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
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Tax Credit Dispute Resolved: Petitioner Wins Challenge, Respondent Ordered to Reassess Input Tax Credit Claim Under Sections 16(4) and 16(5)</h1> <h3>PRASAD A Versus STATE TAX OFFICER, TAX PAYER SERVICES CIRCLE STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT THE STATE TAX OFFICER (WC), STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS, GST POLICY WING, STATE OF KERALA, UNION OF INDIA</h3> HC ruled in favor of petitioner, setting aside tax assessment order and directing respondent to reconsider input tax credit claim under Section 16(4) and ... Denial of input tax credit on account of the provisions contained in Section 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Acts - constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Acts - HELD THAT:- Taking into consideration the directions issued by this Court in M. Trade Links [2024 (6) TMI 288 - KERALA HIGH COURT], this writ petition can be disposed of, setting aside Ext. P3 assessment order to the extent that it denied input tax credit on account of the provisions contained in Section 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Acts and directing that the claim of the petitioner be considered in terms of the directions issued by this Court in M. Trade Links and also taking note of the provision of Section 16(5) of the CGST/SGST Acts. Exts.P3 is set aside to the extent that it denies input tax credit on account of the provisions contained in Section 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Act and it is directed that benefit of the directions contained in the judgment in M. Trade Links shall also be extended to the petitioner - Petition disposed off. The petitioner, an assessee under the CGST/SGST Acts, challenged the denial of input tax credit under Section 16(4). The High Court set aside the assessment order, directing consideration of the petitioner's claim in line with previous court directions and Section 16(5). The respondent must decide within three months, suspending coercive proceedings related to denied input tax credit.