1. Home

SGST High Court Cases

GST – Challenge to validity of Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 – Rendering of Works Contract service, Wrong availment of Input Tax Credit, Necessity of Notification for enforcing Section 43A of the CGST Act, 2017 – Petitioner challenge the validity of Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 on the ground that it derives power from Section 43A(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 which was never notified for enforcement by the Central Government - Whether Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 is constitutionally and legally valid even if Section 43A of the CGST Act, 2017 which was inserted by the CGST (Amendment) Act, 2018 but never notified for enforcement - HELD – The Section 43A of the CGST Act never came into operation because the Central Government never notified any date for its enforcement till it was omitted by the Finance Act, 2022, i.e. from 01.10.2022 – Section 16 of the CGST Act and Rule 36 of CGST Rules are in relation to eligibility of a registered person who can avail input tax credit by furnishing required documents, whereas Section 43A of the CGST Act is defining procedure for furnishing returns for availing input tax credit. Thus, the eligibility conditions and requirement of documents for availing input tax credit is distinct from the procedure of furnishing return for availing said benefit - Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 derives its power from Section 16 of the CGST Act, 2017 which deals with the eligibility and conditions for taking input tax credit, and not from Section 43A which relates to the procedure for furnishing returns and availing input tax credit. Section 164 of the CGST Act empowers the Central Government to make rules for carrying out the provisions of the Act. Therefore, Rule 36(4) is valid as it falls within the scope of the general power conferred by Section 164(2) of the CGST Act, irrespective of the fact that Section 43A was never notified for enforcement - the petitioner cannot be permitted to rely on Rule 36(4) for availing input tax credit on one hand, and challenge the validity of the same rule on the other hand. Accordingly, the Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 is constitutionally and legally valid - The writ petition challenging the validity of Rule 36(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 is dismissed
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Dr. G. Gokul Kishore

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

Credit Notes ITC Reversal in IMS…
By Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?