Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

capital goods destroyed in fire

Kaustubh Karandikar

In case of capital goods destroyed in fire on which ITC is claimed, the ITC to be reversed on it whether will be on

1) entire ITC originally claimed or

2) as per the formula prescribed under Rule 44(6) of CGST Rules 2017?

Debate on Reversal of Input Tax Credit for Fire-Damaged Capital Goods under GST: Rule 44(6) vs. Rule 40(2) A discussion on a forum addresses the reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for capital goods destroyed by fire under GST regulations. Participants debate whether to reverse ITC based on the entire originally claimed amount or using Rule 44(6) of the CGST Rules 2017. Some argue there is a gap in the law for used capital goods not yet fully depreciated. Others suggest using Rule 40(2) as a guideline to avoid litigation, though this is not definitive. The discussion highlights differing interpretations and potential litigation risks due to the lack of specific provisions for such scenarios. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues