<?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>The correct interpretation of section 16 (2) (c) of the CGST Act. High Court of Tripura</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=15720</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the denial provision in Section 16(2)(c) should be read down so that input tax credit may be denied only where a transaction is not bona fide or is collusive/fraudulent; Parliament failed to distinguish bona fide purchasers, and purchasers cannot be required to ensure suppliers deposit collected tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2026 12:57:51 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2026 12:57:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=877635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>The correct interpretation of section 16 (2) (c) of the CGST Act. High Court of Tripura</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=15720</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the denial provision in Section 16(2)(c) should be read down so that input tax credit may be denied only where a transaction is not bona fide or is collusive/fraudulent; Parliament failed to distinguish bona fide purchasers, and purchasers cannot be required to ensure suppliers deposit collected tax.</description>
      <category>Articles</category>
      <law>Goods and Services Tax - GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2026 12:57:51 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=15720</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>