2019 (8) TMI 1395 - HC - GST

Rectification of Form GST TRAN-01 - CENVAT Credit available in terms of Section 140 of the CGST Act - transitional credit - HELD THAT - From perusal of Annexure-F it is evident that the concerned Authority has requested the petitioner to approach Nodal Officer, GST in order to set right the technical breach. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the decision in M/S. MANJUNATHA DESIGNER TILES VERSUS THE NODAL OFFICER/PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER DIVISION 7, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAXES BENGALURU AND OTHERS 2019 (7) TMI 140 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT , wherein direction has been issued to the Nodal Officer GST - From perusal of Annexure-F it is evident that the concerned Authority has requested the petitioner to approach Nodal Officer, GST in order to set right the technical breach - The aforesaid decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner has already reached the next stage relating consideration of the grievance of the petitioner therein. Therefore, the cited decision has no assistant to the present petition. Petition dismissed as pre-mature.

Summary

Issues:
1. Petition seeking Writ of Mandamus to reopen GST common portal for rectifying Form GST TRAN-01
2. Petition seeking Writ of Certiorari to quash an Endorsement
3. Determination of the appropriate authority for addressing the petitioner's concerns

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to direct the third Respondent to reopen the GST common portal for rectifying Form GST TRAN-01 to claim CENVAT Credit. However, the Court noted that the petitioner should have approached the Nodal Officer of GST instead of directly filing the petition. The Court emphasized the need for the petitioner to follow the proper procedure and dismissed the petition as premature.

2. Additionally, the petitioner requested a Writ of Certiorari to quash an Endorsement. The Court observed that the concerned Authority had advised the petitioner to contact the Nodal Officer of GST to rectify the technical breach. The Court referenced a previous decision where a similar direction was given to the Nodal Officer. As the issue was already under consideration, the Court found the current petition premature and dismissed it.

3. The Court highlighted that the petitioner's contention of having approached the Nodal Officer was not supported by evidence, as the endorsement indicated otherwise. The Court rejected the petitioner's claim and reiterated the importance of following the proper channels for grievance redressal. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the Nodal Officer as per the endorsement dated 08.05.2019. Ultimately, the petition was dismissed, emphasizing the need for adherence to the established procedures for addressing concerns related to GST matters.