2019 (1) TMI 680 - HC - GST

Filing of TRAN-I Form - input tax credit - Section 140(3) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - Held that - The petitioner has asserted that substantial credit was available to it on the transactions which it conducted prior to 30.03.2017, for which the law entitled it to credit, it appears to the Court that the authorities have so far not looked into the merits of the claim for input credit but rather rejected his entire entitlement itself on the ground that the credit reflected in the electronic ledger does not show any figure - The conundrum which the Court is presented with here is that if the petitioner were to obtain a screenshot of the figures it had filled just before it actually uploaded TRAN-I, the Revenue would have then contended that those figures were inchoate as the document would not have been final and was merely at the stage of preparation. The Court is of the opinion that the respondents should disclose as to what was actually filled in the TRAN-I Form whether for the first time or the second time when it was uploaded , by the petitioner in this case and the basis of its assertion that no credit was available to it, having regard to the fact that the petitioner claims credit on the basis of real transactions in real goods. List on 13th March, 2019.

Summary

Issues:
1. Discrepancy in claiming credit in TRAN-I Form under Section 140(3) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
2. Allegation of no reflection of appropriate credits in the electronic ledger.
3. Respondent's denial of fault and reference to IT Grievance Redressal Committee meeting.
4. Petitioner's assertion of successfully uploading the TRAN-I Form.
5. Lack of provision for review before uploading the form and absence of automatically generated response indicating figures.
6. Court's direction for disclosure of filled details in the form and basis of denial of credit by respondents.
7. Filing of affidavits by concerned respondents and submission of necessary files before the Court.

Analysis:
The petitioner raised concerns regarding the credit claimed in the TRAN-I Form not reflecting in the electronic ledger as mandated by Section 140(3) of the CGST Act, amounting to approximately ?74,96,069 and ?10.5 lakhs. Respondent No.4, GST Network, denied fault, stating that all ITC fields were zero despite form submission. Referring to an IT Grievance Redressal Committee meeting, it was stated that no technical issues were found, leading to rejection of claims without entitlement to credit. The petitioner provided proof of successful form submission, highlighting the absence of figures in the ledger, prompting the Court to question the authorities' rejection solely based on ledger reflection.

The Court noted the lack of a review provision before form submission, complicating the assessment of claims. It highlighted the absence of automatically generated responses indicating figures, which could have clarified discrepancies. Considering the petitioner's claim based on real transactions, the Court directed the respondents to disclose the filled details in the form and the basis for denying credit. Subsequently, the GST Council and respondent No.4 were instructed to file affidavits within two weeks, along with providing necessary case files for review, with the next hearing scheduled for March 13, 2019.