Supreme Court examines validity of CGST Act's ITC denial provision
This case involves a group of petitions challenging the validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which denies Input Tax Credit (ITC) to purchasers if the supplier fails to deposit the tax with the government. The petitioners argue this provision is arbitrary and violates constitutional rights, while the Court examines its vires.
Petitioners: Maruti Enterprise (through Jigneshbhai Bharatbhai Tarpara) and other registered dealers; Respondents: Union of India and State Authorities; Bench: Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi of the High Court of Gujarat.
- The Court examined the vires of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017.
- The Court clarified that the judgment is confined to the examination of the vires of the provision and did not examine the merits of individual matters.
- The Court noted that the petitioners' case hinges on the supplier's default in depositing tax, resulting in the denial of ITC to bona fide purchasers.
Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.
The original document
Document details
| Official title | Supreme Court Weekly Roundup: July 27, 2026 To August 02, 2026 |
| Source body | Supreme Court of India — orders & judgments |
| Reference number | MAHERAVISH REIN v. UNION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 376/2026 |
| Status | closed (order) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Closing date | — |
| Documents | 1 |