2018 (8) TMI 209 - HC - GST

Extension of time period for filing of GST Tran-1 - case of petitioner is that despite making several efforts on the last date for filing of the application, the electronic system of the respondent no.2 did not respond, as a result of which the petitioner is likely to suffer loss of the credit that it is entitled to by passage of time - Held that - The respondents are directed to reopen the portal within two weeks from today. In the event they do not do so, they will entertain the application of the petitioner manually and pass orders on it after due verification of the credits as claimed by the petitioner - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Petitioner seeking writ of mandamus to extend time period for filing GST Tran-1
- Allegation of electronic system failure on last date for filing application
- Respondents' notice of forming a new committee to address individual cases
- Respondents granted one month to file counter affidavit
- Direction to reopen portal within two weeks or entertain application manually

Analysis:
The petitioner approached the court seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the GST council to recommend to the State Government an extension of the time period for filing GST Tran-1. The petitioner claimed that despite efforts on the last filing date, the electronic system did not respond, potentially causing a loss of entitled credit. The respondents informed the court about the possibility of forming a new committee to address such cases, but could not provide a specific timeline. The court granted the respondents one month to file a counter affidavit and directed them to reopen the portal within two weeks. If the portal is not reopened, the respondents were instructed to entertain the petitioner's application manually and verify the claimed credits promptly. Additionally, the petitioner was to be allowed to pay taxes using the regular electronic system maintained for credit consideration.

This judgment highlights the importance of timely filing of GST Tran-1 and the consequences of technical failures in the electronic system. The court's intervention aimed to ensure that the petitioner's entitlement to credit is not jeopardized due to system issues. By granting time for the respondents to respond and directing them to take necessary actions promptly, the court sought to address the petitioner's concerns effectively. The decision to reopen the portal or entertain applications manually demonstrates the court's commitment to upholding the rights of taxpayers in the face of administrative challenges. The case underscores the significance of procedural fairness and the court's role in safeguarding the interests of individuals in matters concerning tax compliance and credit entitlement.