https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771985 The Allahabad HC dismissed a petition challenging denial of input tax credit (ITC) for 2018 transactions with supplier Shree Radhey International, Delhi. The petitioner claimed ITC based on tax invoices, but the supplier never deposited the charged tax with the government. The court held that Section 16(2)(c) mandates actual tax payment by supplier for ITC eligibility. Since the supplier's registration was cancelled and no tax was deposited, the petitioner could not claim ITC benefits. The court distinguished the case from M/s Solvi Enterprises, noting that Section 16(2)(c) provisions were not properly considered in that matter. The mandatory requirement for supplier tax deposit under Section 16(2)(c) was upheld as clear and unambiguous. en-us Mon, 26 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Jun 2025 08:34:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771985 The Allahabad HC dismissed a petition challenging denial of input tax credit (ITC) for 2018 transactions with supplier Shree Radhey International, Delhi. The petitioner claimed ITC based on tax invoices, but the supplier never deposited the charged tax with the government. The court held that Section 16(2)(c) mandates actual tax payment by supplier for ITC eligibility. Since the supplier's registration was cancelled and no tax was deposited, the petitioner could not claim ITC benefits. The court distinguished the case from M/s Solvi Enterprises, noting that Section 16(2)(c) provisions were not properly considered in that matter. The mandatory requirement for supplier tax deposit under Section 16(2)(c) was upheld as clear and unambiguous. Case-Laws GST Mon, 26 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771985