CA Bimal Jain
@BimalGST • 141,050 subscribers
3.5 Lakh+ Followers Across Social Media | GST Litigation Expert | FCA•FCS•LLB | 25+Yrs in GST, Customs, FTP & Indirect Taxes | Author | Tax Litigation
Videos
![💥💥🔴 SC affirms constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) – No ITC to the recipient unless the supplier deposit taxes 📌📌 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhandari Scrap Traders v. Union of India & Ors. [SLP (C) No. 23931 of 2026 dated July 24, 2026] dismissed the Special Leave Petitions filed relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Maruti Enterprise v. Union of India & Ors. [R/Special Civil Application No. 18080 of 2023 and allied matters including R/Special Civil Application No. 749 of 2025 dated May 01, 2026], thereby affirming that Section 16(2)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) is neither unconstitutional nor liable to be read down, and holding that Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) is not available to the recipient unless the tax charged in respect of the supply has actually been paid to the Government by the supplier. Read Our GST Newsletter at:](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2082008319590555971/amplify_video_thumb/2082007953897598976/img/2UOlnHSrg2z1o2pI.jpg)
💥💥🔴 SC affirms constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) – No ITC to the recipient unless the supplier deposit taxes 📌📌 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhandari Scrap Traders v. Union of India & Ors. [SLP (C) No. 23931 of 2026 dated July 24, 2026] dismissed the Special Leave Petitions filed relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Maruti Enterprise v. Union of India & Ors. [R/Special Civil Application No. 18080 of 2023 and allied matters including R/Special Civil Application No. 749 of 2025 dated May 01, 2026], thereby affirming that Section 16(2)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) is neither unconstitutional nor liable to be read down, and holding that Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) is not available to the recipient unless the tax charged in respect of the supply has actually been paid to the Government by the supplier. Read Our GST Newsletter at:
CA Bimal Jain12,584 views • 13 days ago
![ITC simply can't be denied solely for absence of e-way bills & lorry receipts The Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s. Akal Trade Links v. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) [W.P. No. 20601 of 2023 dated June 05, 2026] quashed the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) confirming the demand on the ground of wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) for non-production of lorry receipts, weighment slips and e-way bills, and held that ITC cannot be denied to a bona fide recipient solely on such grounds where the supplier was a registered person during the relevant period, the tax invoices contained vehicle particulars, and the supplier had filed returns and discharged the corresponding tax liability on the disputed supplies. Read Complete GST Newsletter at:](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2074048176814952803/ext_tw_video_thumb/2074047992160817152/pu/img/hGs7YzLs6_9LIict.jpg)
ITC simply can't be denied solely for absence of e-way bills & lorry receipts The Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s. Akal Trade Links v. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) [W.P. No. 20601 of 2023 dated June 05, 2026] quashed the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) confirming the demand on the ground of wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) for non-production of lorry receipts, weighment slips and e-way bills, and held that ITC cannot be denied to a bona fide recipient solely on such grounds where the supplier was a registered person during the relevant period, the tax invoices contained vehicle particulars, and the supplier had filed returns and discharged the corresponding tax liability on the disputed supplies. Read Complete GST Newsletter at:
CA Bimal Jain12,314 views • 1 month ago
![ITC can not be denied, based solely on retrospective cancellation of supplier's GST registration 🎥 Watch Short Video: • The Madras High Court held that Input Tax Credit (ITC) cannot be denied solely because the supplier’s GST registration was cancelled retrospectively. Where the supplier was a validly registered taxpayer on the date of the transaction, retrospective cancellation by itself is not sufficient to reject the recipient’s ITC claim. • The Court observed that the impugned orders primarily relied on the retrospective cancellation of the supplier’s registration, without independently examining whether the underlying supplies were genuine and actually received by the recipient. Such an approach was held to be legally unsustainable. • Reaffirming its earlier ruling in Engineering Tools Corporation, the Court emphasized that GST authorities must verify the authenticity of transactions by examining supporting evidence such as tax invoices, e-way bills, lorry receipts, transport documents, and other records demonstrating actual movement and receipt of goods. • While the Revenue argued that certain invoices were issued after the supplier’s cancellation and that adequate proof of receipt of goods had not been furnished, the Court noted that most transactions had occurred before the cancellation order was passed. Therefore, a detailed factual verification of the transactions was necessary before denying ITC. • Accordingly, the High Court set aside the assessment orders relating to the relevant tax periods and remanded the matters for fresh adjudication. The authorities were directed to reconsider the ITC claims on merits, provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and pass fresh orders in accordance with law within the prescribed timeframe. Madras HC - Fathima Traders vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer [WP Nos. 22419, 22420, &22422 OF 2023]](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2069414409563517232/ext_tw_video_thumb/2069414277195382784/pu/img/BnyLJ_OGCFJdDh7q.jpg)
ITC can not be denied, based solely on retrospective cancellation of supplier's GST registration 🎥 Watch Short Video: • The Madras High Court held that Input Tax Credit (ITC) cannot be denied solely because the supplier’s GST registration was cancelled retrospectively. Where the supplier was a validly registered taxpayer on the date of the transaction, retrospective cancellation by itself is not sufficient to reject the recipient’s ITC claim. • The Court observed that the impugned orders primarily relied on the retrospective cancellation of the supplier’s registration, without independently examining whether the underlying supplies were genuine and actually received by the recipient. Such an approach was held to be legally unsustainable. • Reaffirming its earlier ruling in Engineering Tools Corporation, the Court emphasized that GST authorities must verify the authenticity of transactions by examining supporting evidence such as tax invoices, e-way bills, lorry receipts, transport documents, and other records demonstrating actual movement and receipt of goods. • While the Revenue argued that certain invoices were issued after the supplier’s cancellation and that adequate proof of receipt of goods had not been furnished, the Court noted that most transactions had occurred before the cancellation order was passed. Therefore, a detailed factual verification of the transactions was necessary before denying ITC. • Accordingly, the High Court set aside the assessment orders relating to the relevant tax periods and remanded the matters for fresh adjudication. The authorities were directed to reconsider the ITC claims on merits, provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and pass fresh orders in accordance with law within the prescribed timeframe. Madras HC - Fathima Traders vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer [WP Nos. 22419, 22420, &22422 OF 2023]
CA Bimal Jain10,859 views • 1 month ago
Must listen… Talent vs. Attitude… What is important to possess ☺️
CA Bimal Jain54,131 views • 3 years ago
💥 GST Treatment of Post-Sale Discounts & Input Tax Credit: Explained in Simple Words
CA Bimal Jain19,098 views • 11 months ago
🟥 Very Important Video on Credit Note & Debit Note Under GST, Effective from October 01, 2025
CA Bimal Jain13,479 views • 10 months ago
🙏 "सम्मेद शिखर बचाओ" 🙏 *पर्यटन क्षेत्र और तीर्थ क्षेत्र में बहुत अंतर होता है !! पर्यटक स्थल और धार्मिक स्थल में दिन रात का अंतर होता है। पर्यटक स्थल का मतलब मौज मस्ती का स्थान और धार्मिक स्थल का मतलब वह पवित्र क्षेत्र जहां से किसी भी समुदाय की आस्था जुड़ी हुई होती है।*
CA Bimal Jain35,294 views • 3 years ago
Our first President of GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Shri. Sanjaya Kumar Mishra ji. 💐💐
CA Bimal Jain18,061 views • 2 years ago
No more content to load