Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTCan a Proprietor Firm Claim Input Tax Credit on Mobile Phone and...

Can a Proprietor Firm Claim Input Tax Credit on Mobile Phone and Car Purchased for Personal Use?

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

This article delves into whether a proprietor firm can claim ITC on mobile phones and cars purchased for personal use, supported by the provisions of the GST Act, relevant rules, and illustrative examples.

Understanding ITC under GST

According to Section 16 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, a registered person can claim ITC if the following conditions are met:

The taxpayer must be registered under GST. The goods or services must be used for business purposes. The supplier must have deposited the GST collected. The taxpayer must have a valid tax invoice. The goods or services must not fall under the blocked credit category as specified in Section 17(5) of the CGST Act.

ITC on Mobile Phones: Business vs. Personal Use

1. Mobile Phone Used Exclusively for Business Purposes:

If a mobile phone is purchased exclusively for business use, ITC can be claimed under Section 16 of the CGST Act.

Example: A proprietor purchases a mobile phone for managing client calls and business communications. Since the phone is used entirely for business purposes, ITC can be availed.

2. Mobile Phone Used for Personal Purposes:

If the mobile phone is used solely for personal purposes, ITC cannot be claimed as per Section 17(1) of the CGST Act, which restricts ITC for non-business use.

Example: A proprietor purchases a mobile phone for personal use without any business-related activity. ITC is not available in this case.

3. Mobile Phone Used for Both Business and Personal Purposes:

If the mobile phone is used for both business and personal purposes, ITC can be claimed proportionately under Section 17(2) of the CGST Act.

Example: A mobile phone used 70% for business and 30% for personal purposes allows the taxpayer to claim ITC on the business-use portion.

ITC on Cars: Business vs. Personal Use

1. Car Purchased Exclusively for Business Purposes:

Section 17(5)(a) of the CGST Act blocks ITC on motor vehicles used for transportation of persons unless used for specified purposes such as:

  • Transportation of passengers.
  • Training for driving.
  • Further supply of such vehicles.

Example: If a proprietor buys a car for business-related passenger transportation services, ITC can be claimed.

2. Car Purchased for Personal Use:

ITC cannot be claimed if the car is used for personal purposes, as per Section 17(5)(a).

Example: A car purchased for personal commuting by the proprietor is not eligible for ITC.

3. Car Used for Both Business and Personal Purposes:

ITC is not allowed, even if the car is partially used for business purposes, due to the specific restriction under Section 17(5).

Example: A proprietor using the car 60% for business and 40% for personal purposes still cannot claim ITC.

Read More: All You Need To Know About Crypto Tax Across The World

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 18 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 18, 2026.GSTMADRAS HIGH COURT QUASHES GST CLASSIFICATION...

Dept’s Stand on Export Quota Premium, Rejects CBDT O.M. to Extend S. 80HHC Benefit

The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of civil appeals concerning the tax treatment...

Conditional Court Deposit Doesn’t Stop Interest: Supreme Court  Calls for Uniform Rules on Litigation Deposits

The Supreme Court of India has held that a deposit made by an award-debtor...

Circumstantial Evidence Failed to Form Complete Chain: Supreme Court Acquits 4 Murder Accused 

The Supreme Court has acquitted four accused persons in a 2001 murder case from...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 18 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 18, 2026.GSTMADRAS HIGH COURT QUASHES GST CLASSIFICATION...

Dept’s Stand on Export Quota Premium, Rejects CBDT O.M. to Extend S. 80HHC Benefit

The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of civil appeals concerning the tax treatment...

Conditional Court Deposit Doesn’t Stop Interest: Supreme Court  Calls for Uniform Rules on Litigation Deposits

The Supreme Court of India has held that a deposit made by an award-debtor...