- The Tripura High Court held that Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act should not block ITC in bona fide purchase transactions; it should apply only to non-bona fide or collusive cases.
- The Court said requiring buyers to verify the seller’s tax compliance creates an impossible and disproportionate burden.
- The Karnataka High Court held that the two-year deadline under Section 54 for GST refund applications is mandatory.
- However, delayed refund applicants may seek writ relief from the High Court for condonation of delay, which can also extend the department’s time to act.
Source: vaishlaw.com
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
Latest Posts in "India"
- Traders Urge Punjab Government to Clear Delayed GST Refunds
- GST Council May Unblock ITC on Insurance, Catering, Free Samples, and Wasted Goods
- Assam Uses Data Analytics to Crack Down on GST Fraud
- P&H HC: ITC Cannot Be Denied Mechanically for Supplier’s Fraud
- Telecommunication Towers and GST: From Credit Exclusion to Immovability Test
