TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
All the judgments seem to be either towards retrospective cancellation of supplier (Section 16(2)(a)) or when the supplier has not deposited tax to the government - in Section 16(2)(c). But none are for when the supplier has indulged in fake invoicing with other recipients and us the main recipient is suffering even after having done genuine transactions.
Judgments and provisions for when our supplier indulged in malpractice but we have invoices for genuine transactions
13 Jul 2023 
10 Replies 
6284 Views Asked by
Input tax credit protection for genuine recipients challenged where supplier engaged in fake invoicing, affecting reversal notices.
Issue concerns whether a recipient may retain input tax credit for genuine transactions when the supplier has engaged in fake invoicing or availed bogus credit upstream. Contributors stress that the evidential burden rests on the assessee in show-cause proceedings, relief at adjudication requires proof of tax payment by upstream parties or demonstration of transaction genuineness, and that fake-invoicing disputes are highly fact-specific with limited directly comparable precedents. Practical steps recommended include cross-examination of supplier parties, tracking upstream tax payments, and pursuing appellate remedies. (AI Summary)
Issue concerns whether a recipient may retain input tax credit for genuine transactions when the supplier has engaged in fake invoicing or availed bogus credit upstream. Contributors stress that the evidential burden rests on the assessee in show-cause proceedings, relief at adjudication requires proof of tax payment by upstream parties or demonstration of transaction genuineness, and that fake-invoicing disputes are highly fact-specific with limited directly comparable precedents. Practical steps recommended include cross-examination of supplier parties, tracking upstream tax payments, and pursuing appellate remedies. (AI Summary)