https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788919 Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act and Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules were upheld in validity but read down to preserve input tax credit for bona fide recipients who satisfy the other statutory conditions. The Court reasoned that making credit dependent on the supplier's actual tax remittance, despite the recipient having no effective control over that act, imposes an onerous burden and risks arbitrary denial of credit in genuine transactions. Denial of credit was therefore confined to non-bona fide, collusive, or fraudulent transactions, consistent with the GST scheme's anti-cascading purpose. en-us Mon, 09 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788919 Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act and Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules were upheld in validity but read down to preserve input tax credit for bona fide recipients who satisfy the other statutory conditions. The Court reasoned that making credit dependent on the supplier's actual tax remittance, despite the recipient having no effective control over that act, imposes an onerous burden and risks arbitrary denial of credit in genuine transactions. Denial of credit was therefore confined to non-bona fide, collusive, or fraudulent transactions, consistent with the GST scheme's anti-cascading purpose. Case-Laws GST Mon, 09 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788919