<?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 (10) TMI 580 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444357</link>
    <description>Writ petition challenging denial of input tax credit (Rs. 98,479 under CGST/SGST) was dismissed. HC upheld tax authority&#039;s decision based on Form GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B, finding petitioner failed to respond to show cause notice or provide evidence to discharge burden of proof under Section 155 of GST Act. Petitioner&#039;s non-compliance and inaction led to rejection of claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 15:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=729019" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 580 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444357</link>
      <description>Writ petition challenging denial of input tax credit (Rs. 98,479 under CGST/SGST) was dismissed. HC upheld tax authority&#039;s decision based on Form GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B, finding petitioner failed to respond to show cause notice or provide evidence to discharge burden of proof under Section 155 of GST Act. Petitioner&#039;s non-compliance and inaction led to rejection of claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444357</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>