🚨 🚨 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐔𝐩𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞! 𝐇𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐋𝐭𝐝 🏭 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚 🇮🇳 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐚𝐣𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 🏛 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐚𝐱 𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠

A significant move that could reshape GST mechanisms. 💼

The main issue raised by the petitioner concerns the absence of a proper mechanism to match the credit note of a supplier with the ITC (Input Tax Credit) reversal by the recipient.

Previously, under Section 43 of the CGST Act/RGST Act, there was an obligation for the department to undertake such matching exercises. However, this provision was later removed.The petitioner's counsel argued that it's not feasible for the petitioner to provide a certificate from the recipient as proof of reversal of credit to avail a reduction in tax liability.

They believe the responsibility should fall on the department to perform this matching and that their tax reduction claim shouldn't depend on any certificate or proof of ITC reversal.

The court observed that the main challenge to the provision's validity arises from its workability or practicality.


Since there's currently no statutory requirement for the respondent to perform the matching, if the petitioner seeks a tax liability reduction, they must provide proof of the recipient's reversal.


The petitioner has pointed out difficulties in obtaining such certificates or proofs but has also acknowledged obtaining them.