https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772003 Input tax credit under s.16(2)(c) of the CGST Act was denied to the purchasing dealer solely because the selling dealer allegedly failed to deposit GST. The HC held that where GST charged on invoices was demonstrably paid by the purchaser through banking channels and the department had already initiated proceedings against the supplier, the appellate authority erred in ignoring these material facts. Since a purchaser cannot compel the supplier to remit tax, denial of ITC without due inquiry from the supplier and without pursuing the supplier, was unsustainable, consistent with SC and HC authority requiring investigation/action against the supplier. The impugned orders were quashed and the matter was remanded for reconsideration. en-us Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772003 Input tax credit under s.16(2)(c) of the CGST Act was denied to the purchasing dealer solely because the selling dealer allegedly failed to deposit GST. The HC held that where GST charged on invoices was demonstrably paid by the purchaser through banking channels and the department had already initiated proceedings against the supplier, the appellate authority erred in ignoring these material facts. Since a purchaser cannot compel the supplier to remit tax, denial of ITC without due inquiry from the supplier and without pursuing the supplier, was unsustainable, consistent with SC and HC authority requiring investigation/action against the supplier. The impugned orders were quashed and the matter was remanded for reconsideration. Case-Laws GST Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772003