Taxation360
Book a Consultation
LAW

Tripura HC Reads Down Section 16(2)(c) CGST Act in Favour of Bona Fide Purchasers

Case Laws

High Court Supreme Court ITAT
Citation WP(C) No. 688 of 2022 (Tripura High Court, Judgment dated 06.01.2026)
Act / Law Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Section Section 16(2)(c) — Eligibility & Conditions for ITC

Case Summary & Key Observations

The Tripura High Court examined the constitutional validity and operational interpretation of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, which conditions Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) on actual payment of tax to the Government by the supplier. The dispute arose when the supplier had collected GST from the purchaser but failed to deposit it with the Government, triggering denial of ITC to the recipient.

The Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 16(2)(c) but read down its application to prevent denial of ITC to a bona fide purchaser. The Court held that a compliant recipient cannot be penalised for the default of a supplier, particularly when there is no statutory mechanism enabling the recipient to monitor or enforce supplier compliance.

Key observations include:
• Taxpayer cannot be asked to perform impossible compliance burdens
• GST operates on the principle of value-added taxation, avoiding double tax
• Supplier non-compliance cannot mechanically defeat legitimate ITC claims
• Fraudulent, collusive or non-genuine transactions remain outside protection
• Reliance placed on Quest Merchandising & Arise India (SC affirmed) jurisprudence

Ratio Decidendi

Section 16(2)(c) is constitutional but must be interpreted and applied in a limited manner, such that ITC denial is restricted only to cases involving fraud, collusion or non-bona fide transactions. In genuine transactions, where the purchaser has paid GST to a registered supplier and possesses valid documentation, ITC cannot be denied merely because the supplier failed to deposit tax with the Government.

Practical Takeaway

  • ITC cannot be denied to bona fide purchasers solely on supplier-side defaults
  • Burden shifts to evaluating transactional genuineness rather than strict compliance mismatch
  • Litigation position for compliant taxpayers under Section 16 substantively strengthened
  • CBIC expected to clarify administrative stance in future reconciliations
  • Fraud & collusion cases remain fully litigable against taxpayers

Full Judgment

The full judgment is available in PDF format for reference and citation purposes.
Readers may refer to the complete order for detailed reasoning, operative directions, and judicial analysis.

Share this
Ask a Question Book Consultation