<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (3) TMI 533 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435147</link>
    <description>A purchasing dealer claiming input tax credit under Section 70 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 must prove the genuineness of the purchase transaction; invoices and cheque payments alone are insufficient. The dealer must also produce supporting material showing actual movement of goods and the surrounding facts of delivery, such as the selling dealer&#039;s identity and address, vehicle details, freight payment, and acknowledgement of delivery. Rules 27 and 29 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 govern tax invoices but do not relieve the dealer of that burden. On this basis, the credit claim failed and the contrary view of the Tribunal and High Court was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 17:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=707539" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (3) TMI 533 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435147</link>
      <description>A purchasing dealer claiming input tax credit under Section 70 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 must prove the genuineness of the purchase transaction; invoices and cheque payments alone are insufficient. The dealer must also produce supporting material showing actual movement of goods and the surrounding facts of delivery, such as the selling dealer&#039;s identity and address, vehicle details, freight payment, and acknowledgement of delivery. Rules 27 and 29 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 govern tax invoices but do not relieve the dealer of that burden. On this basis, the credit claim failed and the contrary view of the Tribunal and High Court was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435147</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>