No Input-Tax Credit On IGST Paid Through Pre-Consultation Letter Or TR-6 Challan: Gujarat AAR

In a ruling dated November 24, 2025 Gujarat AAR comprising Shri. Vishal Malani (Memmer- Central Tax) and Smt. Sushma Vora (Member- State Tax) ruled on twin aspects relating to eligibility to avail ITC on the basis of pre-consultation letter and limitation in terms of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. The AAR held that payment of differential duty online through the E-payment option on the basis of Pre-consultation letter issued prior to a Show Cause Notice or TR-6 challan would not constitute as documents evidencing payment of tax under the Customs and hence were not valid duty‑paying documents.

“We find that neither the pre-consultation letter issued under the Customs Act, 1962 nor the duty paying challan find a mention in either Section 16(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 or Rule 36 of the CGST Rules, 2017.”

Applicant imported a fully automatic mold cleaning machine with parts and accessories under CTH 8437 8090 and paid IGST @5% by claiming duty benefit of Sl. No. 257 of Schedule I of IGST Notification No. 01-IGST dated June 27, 2017. The Customs Authorities took a view that imported goods would fall under Serial No. 329A of Schedule III of IGST Notification, to be classified under CTH 8437 as 'Machines for cleaning, sorting or grading, seed, grain or dried leguminous vegetables, machinery used in milling industry or for the working of cereals or dried leguminous vegetables other than farm type machinery and parts thereof', taxable at 18%. Thereafter, a pre-consultation letter was issued seeking to recovery the differential duty of IGST amounting to Rs. 27,14,559 along with applicable interest under Section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962.

On eligibility to avail ITC, the AAR cited Section 16(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 together with Rule 36 of the CGST Rules, 2017 to state that the phrase appearing in Rule 36 (1)(d) 'any similar documents prescribed under the Customs Act, 1962' must be read ejusdem generis with the preceding word 'Bill of Entry'. The AAR held that the phrase 'similar document' cannot include a Pre-Consultation letter or a challan since the legislature intended it to mean a Courier Bill of Entry or other declarations/Forms prescribed under the Customs Act, 1962.

The AAR referred to Circular No. 16/2023‑Customs which clarified that TR‑6 challan is not a prescribed document for ITC; only re‑assessed Bill of Entry transmitted to GSTN and subsequently reflected in applicant's GSTR-2B would qualify as duty-paid.

The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling in case of Mitsubishi Electric India and Beckton Dickinson has held that a TR-6 challan is not a prescribed document. The Madras High Court in the case of Data Patterns India Ltd. has granted stay on recovery proceedings where the payment of IGST on imports was made through TR-6 challan which was not recognized by the Customs Department.

Case Detail: Hansaben Jayantibhai Patel

For Applicant: Advocate Chintan Kansara

Click here to read the AAR order.