Case Law
Subject : Taxation Law - Indirect Tax
Chennai, Tamil Nadu – The Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, after the petitioner chose to withdraw the case. The provision, which imposes a time limit for claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC), remains a contentious issue for taxpayers nationwide.
A Division Bench comprising Honourable Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth and Honourable Mr. Justice N. Senthilkumar presided over the matter.
The petition, filed by M/s. Sri Ramya Traders, sought a declaration that Section 16(4) of the CGST Act and the corresponding rules are ultra vires the parent Act and violate fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. Specifically, the petitioner contended that the time limit for availing ITC was arbitrary and infringed upon Articles 14 (right to equality), 19(1)(g) (right to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business), and 300A (right to property).
The respondents in the case included the Union of India, the State of Tamil Nadu, and the Deputy State Tax Officer, Salem.
During the proceedings on July 9, 2025, the counsel for the petitioner, Mr. V. Srikanth, made an endorsement on the case file stating that the petitioner did not wish to pursue the matter further.
Accepting this submission, the High Court issued a brief order stating: "Mr.V.Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner, makes an endorsement to the effect that the petitioner does not wish to pursue this Writ Petition, recording which, this Writ Petition and connected miscellaneous petition are dismissed as withdrawn. No costs."
The dismissal of the petition as "withdrawn" means the court did not deliberate on the merits of the constitutional challenge to Section 16(4) of the CGST Act. Consequently, this order does not set a legal precedent on the validity of the provision, and the crucial legal question remains open for adjudication in other pending cases before various high courts and the Supreme Court.
For businesses and tax professionals, the time limit for claiming ITC as prescribed under Section 16(4) continues to be legally enforceable until a superior court rules otherwise. This withdrawal highlights the complexities and strategic considerations involved in challenging major tax legislation.
#GST #MadrasHighCourt #TaxLaw
Rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act Prevail Over Detention Period Claims: High Court of J&K and Ladakh
11 Mar 2026
Failure to Pay Compensation Vitiates Limitation Claims in Land Acquisition: High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh
04 Mar 2026
Discretionary Nature of Section 143-A NI Act: J&K&L High Court Upholds Interim Compensation Based on Accused's Conduct
12 Jun 2026
Salman Khan Files Delhi HC Plea Against 'Kala Hiran'
12 Jun 2026
Writ Court Cannot Exercise Jurisdiction to Grant Interim Relief After Directing Litigant to Civil Forum: MP High Court
12 Jun 2026
Delayed Registration of Birth Certificate Without Statutory Compliance Is Not Proof of Minority: Sikkim High Court
12 Jun 2026
Personal Participation in Contract Work Creates Employer-Employee Tie Under Employees Compensation Act: Kerala High Court
12 Jun 2026
Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Rajya Sabha Nomination Rejection
12 Jun 2026
Insufficient Evidence to Prove Minority or Kidnapping: Gujarat High Court Acquits Two in Atrocity Act Case
29 Jan 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.