<?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>Input tax credit on genuine GST invoices when supplier fails to remit tax: Section 16(2)(c) read down, denial set aside</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95855</link>
    <description>Section 16(2)(c) CGST Act, requiring that the supplier must have paid tax to enable the purchaser&#039;s ITC, was examined where the purchaser had paid GST to the supplier under genuine invoices but the supplier allegedly failed to remit it. The provision was held constitutionally valid, but was read down to avoid disproportionate consequences and arbitrariness under Article 14 by distinguishing bona fide purchasers from collusive or fraudulent transactions. Since there was no allegation of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression by the purchaser and recovery mechanisms against the defaulting supplier existed, ITC could not be denied to the bona fide purchaser; the impugned denial order was set aside and the petition partly allowed. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:53:11 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:53:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=876714" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Input tax credit on genuine GST invoices when supplier fails to remit tax: Section 16(2)(c) read down, denial set aside</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95855</link>
      <description>Section 16(2)(c) CGST Act, requiring that the supplier must have paid tax to enable the purchaser&#039;s ITC, was examined where the purchaser had paid GST to the supplier under genuine invoices but the supplier allegedly failed to remit it. The provision was held constitutionally valid, but was read down to avoid disproportionate consequences and arbitrariness under Article 14 by distinguishing bona fide purchasers from collusive or fraudulent transactions. Since there was no allegation of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression by the purchaser and recovery mechanisms against the defaulting supplier existed, ITC could not be denied to the bona fide purchaser; the impugned denial order was set aside and the petition partly allowed. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:53:11 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95855</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>