9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1935 - HC - GSTCorrection in GST registration certificate - permission to file returns as per provision of the Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 - permission to submit form GST TRAN-01, through common portal and treat it, filed within time - HELD THAT - It is settled proposition of law that no one should be left remediless. Since remedy is not available to the petitioner-company, the petitioner- company could not submit its monthly returns and GST TRAN-1 within time solely for the reason that after closure of portal uploading of information is not possible in any way. Besides this, the respondents themselves have allotted defective registration certificate to the petitioner-company and they cannot punish the petitioner-company for their own fault. This court is of the view that as the petitioner- company could not file its monthly return in regard to payment of GST within time due to no fault of it and the portal got closed and cannot be operated offline, therefore, it is directed that the respondents shall open the portal forthwith so as to enable the petitioner-company to file its monthly returns and GST TRAN-1 within 10 days from today - Petition disposed off.
Issues:
1. Incorrect details in the GST registration certificate issued to the petitioner. 2. Inability of the petitioner to file monthly returns and GST TRAN-1 due to the defective certificate. 3. Lack of offline mechanism for filing returns leading to the petitioner's inability to comply with deadlines. 4. Request for relief to rectify the defects in the registration certificate and allow filing of returns. Analysis: 1. The petitioner sought corrections in the GST registration certificate due to various discrepancies, including the wrong mention of a director's PAN number instead of the company's PAN, incorrect legal name, and the firm's constitution being wrongly stated as a partnership instead of a private limited company. These errors hindered the petitioner's compliance with GST laws. 2. The petitioner, being unable to file monthly returns and GST TRAN-1 on time as a result of the defective certificate, highlighted the importance of carrying forward credits from the pre-GST regime to the current one. The petitioner diligently applied for migration and promptly notified authorities of the errors, but no corrective action was taken, impacting the petitioner's tax benefits and input credit. 3. The absence of an offline mechanism for filing returns posed a challenge for the petitioner, as online submissions were time-bound and became impossible after the portal closure. The court acknowledged the petitioner's predicament and emphasized the need for a remedy to ensure compliance, considering the circumstances that led to the petitioner's non-compliance. 4. Recognizing the petitioner's plight due to the faulty registration certificate and the unavailability of offline filing options, the court directed the authorities to open the portal promptly for the petitioner to submit pending returns within a specified timeframe. Additionally, the court mandated rectification of all defects in the certificate and instructed the authorities to credit any taxes paid under previous acts in the current GST regime, providing the necessary relief sought by the petitioner. This judgment underscores the significance of accurate registration details, timely compliance, and the need for accessible filing mechanisms to prevent undue hardships on taxpayers.
|
