<?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>Negative blocking of ITC beyond available credit held ultra vires Rule 86A; excess electronic ledger block quashed</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94574</link>
    <description>HC examined the challenge to negative blocking of ITC in the petitioner&#039;s electronic credit ledger beyond the credit actually available on the relevant date. Relying on its earlier ratio in Rawman Metal &amp; Alloyes and concurring with views of other HCs that negative blocking is ultra vires Rule 86A, the HC held the impugned communication/order invalid to the extent it blocked ITC in excess of Rs. 7,06,770/-. As the petitioner did not dispute blocking up to Rs. 7,06,770/-, the order was sustained only to that limited extent. A writ of mandamus was issued directing the respondent authorities to immediately unblock ITC blocked over and above Rs. 7,06,770/- in the petitioner&#039;s electronic credit ledger. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=867590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Negative blocking of ITC beyond available credit held ultra vires Rule 86A; excess electronic ledger block quashed</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94574</link>
      <description>HC examined the challenge to negative blocking of ITC in the petitioner&#039;s electronic credit ledger beyond the credit actually available on the relevant date. Relying on its earlier ratio in Rawman Metal &amp; Alloyes and concurring with views of other HCs that negative blocking is ultra vires Rule 86A, the HC held the impugned communication/order invalid to the extent it blocked ITC in excess of Rs. 7,06,770/-. As the petitioner did not dispute blocking up to Rs. 7,06,770/-, the order was sustained only to that limited extent. A writ of mandamus was issued directing the respondent authorities to immediately unblock ITC blocked over and above Rs. 7,06,770/- in the petitioner&#039;s electronic credit ledger. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94574</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>