https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757609 The AP HC ruled in favor of the petitioner regarding refund of input tax credits for electricity supply. The court held that under Section 12(2) of CGST Act, time of supply for continuous goods supply is determined by whichever is earlier between invoice preparation date or payment date, not the actual supply period. Since the petitioner was contractually required to raise electricity bills by the 7th of the succeeding month, the time of supply legally occurred when the bill was presented in the following month, despite electricity being supplied in the previous month. The court allowed the writ petitions, setting aside both original and appellate orders. en-us Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 May 2025 10:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757609 The AP HC ruled in favor of the petitioner regarding refund of input tax credits for electricity supply. The court held that under Section 12(2) of CGST Act, time of supply for continuous goods supply is determined by whichever is earlier between invoice preparation date or payment date, not the actual supply period. Since the petitioner was contractually required to raise electricity bills by the 7th of the succeeding month, the time of supply legally occurred when the bill was presented in the following month, despite electricity being supplied in the previous month. The court allowed the writ petitions, setting aside both original and appellate orders. Case-Laws GST Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757609