Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsA reported proposal could protect genuine GST buyers from losing input tax credit (ITC) when a supplier collects tax but fails to deposit it. It has not been approved. Mint, citing ANI and unnamed sources, reported that the GST Council may consider the proposal at its 57th meeting, scheduled for 7 October 2026. That date is after the latest information available here, dated 5 October 2026. The Council’s decision and any subsequent government action should be checked before treating the proposal as current law. Mint’s report
What protection is the Council reportedly considering?
According to Mint, the proposal is intended to stop a genuine buyer from losing ITC solely because the supplier failed to deposit GST collected on the transaction. The report describes a qualifying buyer as having completed a genuine purchase, paid the supplier the applicable tax, received the goods or services and held a valid invoice. It says recovery would instead be pursued against the defaulting supplier.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Mint also says the reported proposal would not protect businesses that knowingly engage in fraud. These are descriptions of a proposal, not enacted eligibility conditions or final statutory wording. The report separately mentions possible consideration of a wider range of expenses eligible for ITC, but does not establish what expenses would be covered or whether that idea would be adopted. Mint’s report
Is a buyer protected under current law if a supplier does not deposit GST?
The report does not establish that buyers currently have this proposed protection. Whether ITC can be claimed or retained depends on applicable law, the transaction and the buyer’s evidence; a reported Council discussion is not itself a legal change. Check for an official Council recommendation, government notification or statutory amendment, along with its effective date and conditions.
#1 Best Overall
The GST Council’s agenda for its 53rd meeting reproduces statutory ITC conditions and records earlier deliberations. It provides background on the conditions governing ITC, but does not confirm the reported 2026 supplier-default proposal. GST Council 53rd meeting agenda
Supplier default and buyer non-payment are different situations
Do not confuse the reported proposal with the existing rule for a buyer who has not paid its own supplier. Under the CBIC-hosted rules, when a registered recipient avails ITC but does not pay the supplier the value of the supply and the tax within the specified 180-day period, the recipient must report the supply and credit. The amount is added to the recipient’s output tax liability and interest applies as described in the rule. CBIC-hosted rules
| Situation | What the cited material says | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Buyer fails to pay supplier | After the specified 180-day non-payment condition, the recipient reports the supply and credit; the amount is added to output tax liability and interest applies as described in the rule. | Existing rule described by CBIC. Source |
| Supplier collects tax but fails to deposit it | Mint reports that the Council may consider protecting a genuine buyer and pursuing recovery from the supplier. | Reported proposal, not an approved change. Source |
What does the court-related material establish?
A Telangana government GST handbook, in its February 2026 edition, summarizes a High Court case involving a bona fide purchaser. The handbook says the court observed that a purchaser cannot compel a seller to file returns or deposit tax collected from the buyer, and that where a buyer diligently meets its duties, the department should act against the defaulting supplier.
The handbook reports that assessment and appellate orders were quashed and the matter remanded for reconsideration after hearing the parties and considering bona fide conduct. That is a summary of a particular case and its procedural outcome—not blanket immunity for buyers and not confirmation that the reported Council proposal has become law. Telangana government GST handbook, February 2026
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What should a buyer do while the proposal remains unconfirmed?
- Keep the invoice and records showing the actual supply, receipt of goods or services, and payment to the supplier, including the tax amount.
- Reconcile purchase and tax records, and retain evidence of steps taken to verify the supplier and transaction.
- Distinguish a supplier’s failure to deposit tax from your own failure to pay the supplier; the latter is addressed by the CBIC-hosted 180-day rule.
- Do not treat the reported proposal as an available election or settled remedy. For a disputed credit, get advice based on the facts and applicable law.
- Check official Council and government publications for any recommendation, notification or amendment, including its effective date, evidence requirements, exclusions and recovery mechanism.
The Council’s 47th meeting agenda includes official material on fake invoices and fraudulent ITC claims. It provides context for the distinction between genuine transactions and fraud, but does not set final exclusions for the proposal described in Mint’s report. GST Council 47th meeting agenda
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
