<?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>2025 (11) TMI 2035 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470283</link>
    <description>Blocking input tax credit under Rule 86A requires credit to be available in the electronic credit ledger on the date of the blocking order. Where the ledger carried a nil balance, an order purporting to block credit for specified financial years amounted to impermissible negative blocking and was unsustainable under the governing precedents. Input tax credit could therefore not be blocked against a nil electronic credit ledger, and the issue was resolved in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 23:33:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=912850" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 2035 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470283</link>
      <description>Blocking input tax credit under Rule 86A requires credit to be available in the electronic credit ledger on the date of the blocking order. Where the ledger carried a nil balance, an order purporting to block credit for specified financial years amounted to impermissible negative blocking and was unsustainable under the governing precedents. Input tax credit could therefore not be blocked against a nil electronic credit ledger, and the issue was resolved in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>