https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770112 Retrospective insertion of section 16(5) of the CGST/BGST Acts required the appellate authority to reconsider rejection of input tax credit, because the amended provision extended the time to avail credit on invoices or debit notes for FY 2017-18 to 2020-21 in returns filed up to 30 November 2021. An order based only on section 16(4) could not stand without applying the amended legal position, so the credit issue was remanded for fresh consideration. Recovery under sections 78 and 79 could not be initiated before expiry of the statutory waiting period for payment, as section 79 operates only after the amount becomes recoverable under section 78. Premature recovery was therefore illegal and the recovered amount had to be refunded with interest. en-us Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 May 2025 15:36:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770112 Retrospective insertion of section 16(5) of the CGST/BGST Acts required the appellate authority to reconsider rejection of input tax credit, because the amended provision extended the time to avail credit on invoices or debit notes for FY 2017-18 to 2020-21 in returns filed up to 30 November 2021. An order based only on section 16(4) could not stand without applying the amended legal position, so the credit issue was remanded for fresh consideration. Recovery under sections 78 and 79 could not be initiated before expiry of the statutory waiting period for payment, as section 79 operates only after the amount becomes recoverable under section 78. Premature recovery was therefore illegal and the recovered amount had to be refunded with interest. Case-Laws GST Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770112