<?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>2025 (2) TMI 502 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765956</link>
    <description>Input tax credit under GST is not treated as wrongly availed merely because it was booked under CGST and SGST heads instead of IGST, where the credit was otherwise available and used for GST payment. The Kerala HC noted that the credit ledger operates as a common pool with separate heads, and the impugned Section 73 orders had not applied the correct legal position. The orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration in light of the governing principle.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2025 14:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=797382" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 502 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765956</link>
      <description>Input tax credit under GST is not treated as wrongly availed merely because it was booked under CGST and SGST heads instead of IGST, where the credit was otherwise available and used for GST payment. The Kerala HC noted that the credit ledger operates as a common pool with separate heads, and the impugned Section 73 orders had not applied the correct legal position. The orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration in light of the governing principle.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>