https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302261 The appeal challenging the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on construction services for industrial area development was rejected. The Appellate Authority upheld the decision that such expenses are capital in nature and must be capitalized, falling under the blocked credit provisions of Section 17(5) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017. The appellant's argument that the expenses were not capitalized as fixed assets was dismissed, emphasizing that the development work constituted construction of immovable property, making ITC ineligible. The appellant's reliance on precedent cases was deemed either contextually different or lacking precedence value. en-us Thu, 17 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Mar 2025 14:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302261 The appeal challenging the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on construction services for industrial area development was rejected. The Appellate Authority upheld the decision that such expenses are capital in nature and must be capitalized, falling under the blocked credit provisions of Section 17(5) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017. The appellant's argument that the expenses were not capitalized as fixed assets was dismissed, emphasizing that the development work constituted construction of immovable property, making ITC ineligible. The appellant's reliance on precedent cases was deemed either contextually different or lacking precedence value. Case-Laws GST Thu, 17 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302261