Mistakenly claiming eligible IGST credit under CGST and SGST categories is a technical error, not a wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC), provided no revenue loss occurred. Kerala High Court view the electronic credit ledger as a unified fund, allowing for such rectification without penalties. M/s Grand Hyundai vs State Tax Officer, Kerala[Writ Petition (C) No. 499/2025; 08-Jan-2025] Earlier judgment Rejimon Padickapparambil Alex vs Union of India upheld. (2025) 93 GSTL 23 (Kerala) An assessee had an assessment order imposing liability under Section 73 for allegedly utilising excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) because they availed IGST credit under the CGST and SGST heads. The assessee challenged this order. During the appeal, the Kerala High Court's ruling in Rejimon Padickapparambil Alex v. Union of India [2024] 169 taxmann. com 152 (Kerala)/[2025] 107 GST 483 (Kerala)/[2025] 93 GSTL 23 (Kerala) was brought up. This ruling stated that the electronic credit ledger is like a wallet with different compartments for IGST, CGST, and SGST, and merely availing IGST credit under CGST and SGST heads does not constitute "wrong availment" of ITC if the assessee was genuinely eligible for the credit and no revenue loss occurred. The assessee argued that this principle directly applied to their case. However, the court stated that since the appeal against the assessment order was still pending, they could not directly interfere with the impugned assessment order at that stage.