9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 450 - HC - GSTFiling of TRAN-1 - Input Tax Credit - carry forward the credit on eligible duties of goods in electronic credit ledger in terms of Section 140(3) and 140(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Since these writ petitions are filed challenging the proceedings, which in effect is against not considering the request of the petitioner to avail the input tax credit on the reason that the time for filing TRAN-1 has lapsed and since it is stated that the said issue is now forwarded to GSTN through the Principal Nodal Officer (Commissioner of CGST, Chennai North) for necessary further action, it is for the petitioner to approach the said authority and pursue the matter further so as to enable him to pass appropriate orders. The Writ Petitions are disposed of, only with a direction to the Principal Nodal Officer (Commissioner of CGST, Chennai North) to take appropriate action without loss of further time so as to get the issues resolved by GSTN at the earliest possible time, at any event, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Issues:
Challenging rejection of request for filing TRAN-1 for Input Tax Credit under CGST Act, 2017. Analysis: The writ petitions were filed to challenge the orders rejecting the petitioner's request to file TRAN-1 for availing Input Tax Credit under Sections 140(3) and 140(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. An interim order was passed allowing the petitioner to appear before the Nodal Officer at Coimbatore with all relevant materials. The petitioner had faced difficulties in accessing the website to file the form, leading to the rejection of the request. The Central Government Standing Counsel clarified that the petitioner needed to approach the Principal Nodal Officer in Chennai North for further action. The Central Government Standing Counsel produced a record of hearing indicating that the matter was forwarded to the GST Council/GSTN through the Principal Nodal Officer for necessary action. The court noted that the denial of the request was due to the lapse of time for filing TRAN-1. The issue was now forwarded to GSTN for resolution, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the matter with the Principal Nodal Officer to enable the consideration of the claim by GSTN. The court emphasized that the denial was solely due to the time lapse for filing TRAN-1 and instructed the Principal Nodal Officer to take prompt action to resolve the issues with GSTN within six weeks. In conclusion, the writ petitions were disposed of with a direction to the Principal Nodal Officer in Chennai North to facilitate the resolution of the issues by GSTN promptly. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
|
