https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302208 The applicant, a Rajasthan State Government-owned Public Sector Undertaking, was denied Input Tax Credit (ITC) on input services for developing an industrial area. The authority ruled that the development work constituted construction of immovable property, disallowing ITC under Section 17(5)(c) and (d) of the CGST Act. The applicant's argument that expenses should not be capitalized was rejected, leading to the conclusion that ITC was not permissible. The question of apportioning ITC between exempt and taxable supplies was not addressed due to the denial of ITC eligibility. Ultimately, the applicant was unable to claim ITC on the mentioned input services. en-us Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Mar 2025 13:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302208 The applicant, a Rajasthan State Government-owned Public Sector Undertaking, was denied Input Tax Credit (ITC) on input services for developing an industrial area. The authority ruled that the development work constituted construction of immovable property, disallowing ITC under Section 17(5)(c) and (d) of the CGST Act. The applicant's argument that expenses should not be capitalized was rejected, leading to the conclusion that ITC was not permissible. The question of apportioning ITC between exempt and taxable supplies was not addressed due to the denial of ITC eligibility. Ultimately, the applicant was unable to claim ITC on the mentioned input services. Case-Laws GST Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302208