JK Tyre & Industries Faces ITC Reversal Setback, Plans to Challenge GST Ruling:

JK Tyre faces a Rs. 17.56 crore setback as GST authorities reject its input tax credit claim on machinery lease, with the company planning to appeal further.
JK Tyre Challenges GST Order on Input Tax Credit Reversal

JK Tyre & Industries Faces ITC Reversal Setback, Plans to Challenge GST Ruling
JK Tyre & Industries Limited, the tyre manufacturers in India, has recently informed about the receipt of an order dated July 15, 2025, from the GST Authorities. The company has disclosed the same to the stock exchanges (NSE and BSE).
The Company, in its letter dated March 17, 2024, informed that it had received an order from the GST Authorities to reverse input tax credit of Rs. 8.78 crores, along with interest and a penalty of Rs. 8.78 crores. In total, this was a financial implication of about Rs. 17.56 crores. The issue was related to the ITC claimed on machinery lease rentals.
The company, i.e., JK Tyre & Industries Limited, believed that the order was not fair and not in compliance with the rules and hence filed an appeal against the order on May 29, 2024, with the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST and Central Excise, Bhopal.
However, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the company, meaning the previous order still stands. Therefore, JK Tyre & Industries Limited is still required to reverse the ITC and pay the related penalty and interest.
The company has decided to challenge this to higher authorities as it still believes it has a strong legal reason. Additionally, the company stated that there is no major impact on its financial status, operations, or day-to-day business activities due to this order. Essentially, while the problem is a legal and accounting matter, it’s not large enough to disturb the company’s overall health or performance.
Other than the reversal of tax credits and the financial demand, there were no penalties, restrictions, or notices for non-compliance. The company has not done anything seriously wrong according to this order. It is mainly a disagreement about how tax benefits were claimed, and now it is turning into a legal issue.
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2389My Recent Articles
- ITAT Remands Section 69 Unexplained Cash Credit Addition After Bank Statement Was Not ExaminedPremium
- ITAT Remands Transfer Pricing Dispute: DRP to Reassess Comparables and Working Capital AdjustmentPremium
- CBDT Notifies TDS Exemption on Aircraft Lease Payments to IFSC Units Under 20-Year Tax Deduction Scheme Premium
- CBDT Grants TDS Exemption On Ship Leasing Payments To IFSC Units Under 20-Year Tax Deduction SchemePremium
- ITAT Remands Case to CIT(A) After Admitting Crucial Sale Deed as Additional Evidence
Up Next
Loading suggestions…









