Sri Padmavathi Marketing v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
Case Facts:
The petitioner challenged a show-cause notice proposing blocking of ITC under Rule 86A and seeking restoration of ₹1.96 crore. The allegation was that the petitioner issued invoices without actual supply of goods, enabling M/s. Million Lights to avail wrongful ITC. The petitioner contended that Rule 86A applies only when ITC is wrongly availed by the assessee itself and not by its customer. The department asserted ongoing investigation and alleged admissions regarding issuance of invoices without supply.
Court Decision:
The Court held that Rule 86A empowers restriction on utilization of ITC only when the credit in the electronic credit ledger of the concerned assessee is fraudulently availed or is ineligible under specified circumstances such as absence of supply, non-existent supplier, non-payment of tax, or lack of valid documents. The Rule is limited to these conditions and cannot be invoked otherwise. In the present case, the allegation was that the petitioner issued invoices without actual supply, leading to wrongful ITC availment by the recipient. Such allegation does not pertain to ITC availed by the petitioner itself. Therefore, invocation of Rule 86A against the petitioner was improper as the statutory conditions were not satisfied.
Other Case Law
South Indian Oil Corporation vs. The Assistant Commissioner,
Refund of accumulated Input Tax Credit under Section 54(3)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017 – inverted duty structure where input and output goods are same. Eligibility of refund despite same tax rate on principal input and output; applicability of GST Circula
Facts:The petitioner, engaged in procurement and sale of edible oils, purchased ...
Read MoreSterling & Wilson Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Odisha Commissionerate of CT & GST & Ors.
Demand due to mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B – Sections 73, 74, 75(2), 112 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Section 34(2) of the CGST Act.
Facts:The appellant was issued a demand under Section 74 of the CGST/OGST Act fo...
Read MoreMarfani Steel Impex, through its proprietor Mohammed Irfan Marfani vs The Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax & Central Excise, Nagpur & Ors.
Show Cause Notice – Clubbing of multiple financial years under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 – validity of consolidated show cause notice for different tax periods.
Facts:The petitioner challenged the show cause notice dated 30.05.2025 issued un...
Read More