https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369555 Section 140 of the CGST Act validly distinguished between inputs and capital goods for transitional credit, allowing credit for inputs received after the appointed day while not extending the same facility to capital goods in transit. The Court held that tax credit is a legislative concession subject to statutory conditions, and in economic legislation the classification was not arbitrary merely because it created hardship or imperfectly treated comparable items. The challenge under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) therefore failed, and no vested right was shown because credit on capital goods arose only on receipt of the goods. en-us Tue, 16 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Feb 2025 13:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369555 Section 140 of the CGST Act validly distinguished between inputs and capital goods for transitional credit, allowing credit for inputs received after the appointed day while not extending the same facility to capital goods in transit. The Court held that tax credit is a legislative concession subject to statutory conditions, and in economic legislation the classification was not arbitrary merely because it created hardship or imperfectly treated comparable items. The challenge under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) therefore failed, and no vested right was shown because credit on capital goods arose only on receipt of the goods. Case-Laws GST Tue, 16 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369555