Interest not payable under GST if ITC availed but not utilized

7 Comments

1. Krish Rajendran says:

   The expression used in the Cenvat Credit rules, 2004 was “availed and utilised”. That means penalty can be imposed if only there are both the activities viz. availment and utilisation. In the GST regime, the expression is “availed or utilised”. The legislative intent is to impose penalty for “availment” itself, even if there is no “utilisation”.

     Reply

   April 21, 2020 at 6:52 pm
2. KrishRajendran says:

   If availment (without utilisation) is not an offence, why Section 122 has stated that penalty is imposable for credit availed or utilised? What is the necessity for the expression ‘availed’? In that case, what does availment mean? High Court can at best declare the usage of the word ‘availed’ as ultravires. In my opinion, High court has wrongly interpreted the meaning of the term ‘availment’.

     Reply

   April 21, 2020 at 6:47 pm
3. Jeetendra says:

   In the header you say that Patna High Court have ruled that ITC availed but not utilized for tax payment doesn’t invite penal consequences of Section 73 of CGST Act, 2017 and interest cannot be recovered on mere availment of ITC which was not utilized. But in the entire judgement it refers to only Sec 73 of BGST Act. Not CGST Act. So is this judgement valid under GST Act?

     Reply

   August 28, 2019 at 9:02 pm
4. Vivek says:

   Whether this result of writ petition can be applicable to whole India or only to Bihar ?

   Thanks in Advance.

     Reply

   July 25, 2019 at 10:22 pm