Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update on Admissibility of Input Tax Credit On Repairs Of Motor Vehicles

GST Update on Admissibility of Input Tax Credit On Repairs Of Motor Vehicles

Input tax credit on the motor vehicles has been restrictive one in the Central Excise and service tax regime as well as in the present GST regime. Section 17(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 prescribes the list of blocked credits and this lists allows the ITC on the motor vehicles on conditional basis. The relevant part of section 17(5) reads as follows:-

"Input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following, namely:—
(a) Motor vehicles and other conveyances except when they are used––
(i) for making the following taxable supplies, namely:—
(A) Further supply of such vehicles or conveyances; or
(B) Transportation of passengers; or
(C) Imparting training on driving, flying, navigating such vehicles or conveyances;
(ii) For transportation of goods;"

The analysis of above portion of the section 17(5) makes it clear that the ITC on motor vehicles and other conveyances is allowed on conditional basis. The language of section 17(5) as highlighted above uses the phrase "in respect of". This phrase is not defined or analyzed anywhere in the GST law. Further, we have not found a single case law analyzing this phrase.
However, earlier under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 the definition of "inputs" had the similar words "in relation to". A lot of case laws were decided by analyzing this phrase by holding that the term "in relation to" is very wide and covers all goods which are either directly or indirectly used in manufacture of final products. This analogy was drawn in the case of NATIONAL CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., MADURAI [2016 (344) E.L.T. 832 (Mad.)] and COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., NAGPUR Versus ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD. [2010 (260) E.L.T. 369 (Bom.)]. On the basis of a number of decisions decided on the basis of analogy drawn by hon'ble High Courts in these cases, credit was allowed on variety of goods that were either directly or indirectly used in manufacture of final products.

Under existing GST regime, the phrase used is "in respect of". This phrase has neither been defined anywhere nor any case law is available on the same. Further, if we consider the general meaning of this phrase, it is treated as synonym of "as regards", "in terms of", "with respect to" or "in accordance with", etc. These words are more or less used interchangeably. Thus, one can interpret that the phrase "in respect of" can be used as a synonym of "in relation to". Therefore, the decisions given in respect of phrase "in relation to" will hold good in this case also. If this interpretation is taken, we can conclude that the clause (1) of section 17(5) of CGST Act will be deemed to be wider in scope in order to restrict each and every types of ITC that is related to any "motor vehicle", i.e. to say, it will deny the ITC on purchase of motor vehicle as well as repairs and maintenance and any other expenses related to motor vehicle.

However, another stream of views is there interpreting the term "in respect of" as contained in section 17(5) of CGST Act, 2017. It has been interpreted that the phrase "in respect of" is very restrictive in nature and it will cover only the ITC involved in purchase of motor vehicle. All the other expenses will be eligible to ITC. This interpretation is based upon the fact that repairs and maintenance of motor vehicles is nowhere denied in section 17(5) or any other provision of CGST Act, 2017. When the ITC is not specifically denied, it is allowed on repairs and maintenance of motor vehicle; as opined by a stream of experts.

It is worthwhile to mention here that the first view of treating the phrase "in respect of" in conjunction with the term "in relation to" is appears more feasible. The reason behind this is that the restrictions contained in the section 17(5) of CGST Act, 2017 are more or less similar to the exclusions contained in the rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In this regard, it is worthwhile to mention here that under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004; credit of expenses incurred on motor vehicles like insurance, repairs and maintenance, etc. of motor vehicle was specifically denied under clause (B) and (BA) of definition of input service if the motor vehicle did not fall in the definition of "capital goods" as given in the rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Further, even the other provisions and restrictions regarding the availment of credit in GST regime has been carried forward with original spirit of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, in our view, looking the drafting of the said section 17(5) read with the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004; the term "in respect of" should be interpreted in broader sense and the ITC of expenses related to motor vehicles like repairs and maintenance, etc. should not be allowed.
The views of all our readers as well as of experts are invited so that we can reach to a conclusion.

You can visit us at www.capradeepjain.com and also at our facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com