<?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 (9) TMI 163 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442541</link>
    <description>Input tax credit on canteen ices is generally blocked under section 17(5)(b) for food and beverages, but the proviso allows credit where the employer is legally obliged to provide the supply under an applicable law. The AAR treated the factories law canteen requirement as a statutory mandate and applied the GST circular clarification to read the proviso as covering the blocked-credit clause more broadly, not only travel-related benefits. On the stated facts, GST charged by the vendor was eligible for credit, subject to the restriction that the tax burden had not been passed on and the claim was limited to the eligible employee category on a proportionate basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 12:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=725033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 163 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442541</link>
      <description>Input tax credit on canteen ices is generally blocked under section 17(5)(b) for food and beverages, but the proviso allows credit where the employer is legally obliged to provide the supply under an applicable law. The AAR treated the factories law canteen requirement as a statutory mandate and applied the GST circular clarification to read the proviso as covering the blocked-credit clause more broadly, not only travel-related benefits. On the stated facts, GST charged by the vendor was eligible for credit, subject to the restriction that the tax burden had not been passed on and the claim was limited to the eligible employee category on a proportionate basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442541</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>