https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790925 Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act was examined against the input tax credit framework and upheld as constitutional. The Court treated input tax credit as a statutory concession, not an absolute right, and read the provision with the surrounding mechanisms on reversal, re-availment, burden of proof, and GST returns that protect revenue interests and allow recovery from defaulting suppliers. It rejected reading down because the text was clear and no constitutional infirmity was shown, and it refused to confine the clause only to fraudulent or collusive transactions. en-us Fri, 01 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 May 2026 07:43:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790925 Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act was examined against the input tax credit framework and upheld as constitutional. The Court treated input tax credit as a statutory concession, not an absolute right, and read the provision with the surrounding mechanisms on reversal, re-availment, burden of proof, and GST returns that protect revenue interests and allow recovery from defaulting suppliers. It rejected reading down because the text was clear and no constitutional infirmity was shown, and it refused to confine the clause only to fraudulent or collusive transactions. Case-Laws GST Fri, 01 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790925