<?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>2024 (12) TMI 1507 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763927</link>
    <description>Input tax credit denied under Section 16(4) was set aside where the petitioner asserted entitlement arising from Section 16(5). The Court held that the matter required fresh consideration by the competent authority, with the later provision taken into account and the petitioner given a hearing. The denial was interfered with only to the extent it rested on Section 16(4), and the issue of input tax credit was remitted for a fresh decision under the applicable statutory framework.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2025 14:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=785203" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1507 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763927</link>
      <description>Input tax credit denied under Section 16(4) was set aside where the petitioner asserted entitlement arising from Section 16(5). The Court held that the matter required fresh consideration by the competent authority, with the later provision taken into account and the petitioner given a hearing. The denial was interfered with only to the extent it rested on Section 16(4), and the issue of input tax credit was remitted for a fresh decision under the applicable statutory framework.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>