https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759687 Whether clauses (c) and (d) of Section 17(5) CGST Act are constitutionally valid: Court held ITC is a legislative creation and clauses may exclude categories (works contract) by plain language; no judicial addition or subtraction is permissible - outcome: clauses upheld. Whether the explanation to Section 17 (defining "plant and machinery") applies to the phrase "plant or machinery" in s.17(5)(d): Court reasoned the legislature deliberately used different wording; the defined phrase and the disjunctive phrase cannot be equated - outcome: the explanation does not automatically apply to "plant or machinery". Proper meaning of "plant or machinery" and buildings as plant: Court held the term is context-specific; a building may be a plant if construction is essential to the taxable person's supplying activity - outcome: factual determination required; writs dismissed subject to this interpretation. en-us Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759687 Whether clauses (c) and (d) of Section 17(5) CGST Act are constitutionally valid: Court held ITC is a legislative creation and clauses may exclude categories (works contract) by plain language; no judicial addition or subtraction is permissible - outcome: clauses upheld. Whether the explanation to Section 17 (defining "plant and machinery") applies to the phrase "plant or machinery" in s.17(5)(d): Court reasoned the legislature deliberately used different wording; the defined phrase and the disjunctive phrase cannot be equated - outcome: the explanation does not automatically apply to "plant or machinery". Proper meaning of "plant or machinery" and buildings as plant: Court held the term is context-specific; a building may be a plant if construction is essential to the taxable person's supplying activity - outcome: factual determination required; writs dismissed subject to this interpretation. Case-Laws GST Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759687