https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431536 The HC held that blocking the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) beyond one year under Rule 86A(1) of the CGST Rules is impermissible and must be limited to specific conditions outlined therein. The expression "inasmuch as" restricts the scope of ineligibility for Input Tax Credit (ITC) to those conditions only. Section 16(2) of the CGST Act does not prohibit availing ITC before payment to the supplier; rather, failure to pay within 180 days requires disgorgement of ITC with interest as part of output liability. The taxpayer is entitled to reclaim ITC upon subsequent payment to the supplier. The respondents erred in blocking ITC in the petitioner's ECL without notice and beyond the lawful period. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, declaring the extended blocking of ITC unauthorized. en-us Mon, 05 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Aug 2025 13:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431536 The HC held that blocking the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) beyond one year under Rule 86A(1) of the CGST Rules is impermissible and must be limited to specific conditions outlined therein. The expression "inasmuch as" restricts the scope of ineligibility for Input Tax Credit (ITC) to those conditions only. Section 16(2) of the CGST Act does not prohibit availing ITC before payment to the supplier; rather, failure to pay within 180 days requires disgorgement of ITC with interest as part of output liability. The taxpayer is entitled to reclaim ITC upon subsequent payment to the supplier. The respondents erred in blocking ITC in the petitioner's ECL without notice and beyond the lawful period. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, declaring the extended blocking of ITC unauthorized. Case-Laws GST Mon, 05 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431536